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.

Ok, sometimes I don't get conventional wisdom on The Internets.

If Blood Angels are balanced relative to other chapters of SM, people call it uninspiring, bland, and boring. Even though there are some very different and interesting units from a gameplay perspective, and certainly a modelling perspective. A lot of people will simply point out that there's no reason to take them because X or Y or Z is just as good, or a little better.

If Blood Angels were to have been stronger relative to other chapters of SM, the complaints would be that they are OP and too good, and that they will be the next FoTM.

I mean, which is preferable? >.<

I'm pretty happy with the BA codex, because it's NOT too good, but there are some interesting things to try out, fluff-wise, they are a unique detachment, and model-wise, they have many distinctive models. Plus, they are not too weak, or obviously gimpy.

I never explicitly collected BA before, but between Deathstorm, the new codex and the new models, I have now started

I agree with you 100%. I think the new codex looks very cool. Very flavorful and fluffy way to run an assault focused chapter. I'm excited to see it in action and I think it can totally stand toe to toe with the vanilla dex.

today i can't stop to repeat: IT'S NOT A BAD CODEX
i repeat: NOT BAD
that does'nt mean is good

it's just... "awesomely average"
they are ofc "just a little melee-flavoured space marine". nothing more
and sure is not the "omfg ubba powah fast assault hand to hand enemy crusher" as they sold it in the fluff

i hope direct experience will make me think different. but i fear not.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
as for replying to new posters:
-> modeling wise they are looking very good. i just feel sad i already have two perfectly still boxed tactical marine boxe and i sure will loooooooooooove to get hands on new BA tacticals H_H
(but really, 30 more tactical marines are way too much for me, even considering i will need to remove JP from my now unused asm...)
-> i agree with who said "post here your list". and me too not asking to make rethorical points, but because i sincerily fail to see how to build a competitive list that can face some high efficiency list my mate play AND be different to a red painted vanilla marine list
-> i also agree that is good to have "not uber good" codex around. this, if all codex would be "not uber good" and fairly balanced, but probably they will never be

 Vaktathi wrote:
The last book did a lot of re-writing and exaggeration of previous traits to make them into something different to justify why they needed their own book. GW appears to largely be removing Mat Ward's influence from army books as much as is possible (that isn't set in immortal plastic) and the rollback with BA's is just one of the most visible aspect of that thus far, given how much he changed them.

That's how I'm seeing it too, honestly. Maybe people shouldn't have raged so hard about Mat Ward for six years?

I think what people are looking for isn't necessarily stronger marines but *different* marines. When you have 1000 chapters and 2 of them are significantly different then there may be a problem with how their codexes are being created. Especially when there are so many of them (marine armies) compared to the other factions. This leads to "well army x is pretty much army y+1".

The problem with the 'old' blood angel codex is it was 'different' and +1 in certain aspects (the wrong ones imo). A simple organisational swap (like biker troops or assault marine troops) can make a noticable difference without having to be +1.

There's nothing glaringly 'wrong' with the new blood angels, they're just 'another' marine army and very comparable to existing marine armies. Which raises the question of maybe they should be rolled into one codex.

dude I got schooled by them 10 - 20 pts today.

The psychic powers really buff their termies and other guys really well. I think they did a great job with the book.

I actually really like the codex, and frankly don't understand what all the complaining is about. Honestly, I'm at a loss. This has, by far, the most flavor and variety of any 7th ed. codex and is absolutely competitive with builds from codex space marines.

I'd guess most lists will be running their codex detachment (baal something or other). This gives all units +1 initiative on the turn they charge. Since all infantry units now have furious charge, this means BA have *army wide* S5 I5 attacks on the charge, *without priests!*. That clearly differentiates them from other SM chapters, and sets the tone for the codex as a whole.

So what are the other changes?

ASM are no longer troops, but since the codex detachment gives up objective secured anyway ... zero &^%@S given? They also got significantly cheaper and get two specials in a 5 man unit. Five ASM with 2x melta and a sarge with dual inferno pistols in a drop pod comes out to 135 points of problem solving win.

Want to run an army with choppy jump infantry? Cool. Paint 'em black. Or their shoulders at least, who cares. Death Company are now terrifying. 23 pts a model with 5 S5/I5 attacks on the charge, FnP and jump infantry, is *amazingly* good. If they could get melta bombs, every BA list would need 4x15 of these. Without melta bombs, they're still fantastic. Sanguinary guard still seem like sort of a hard unit to make work, but with a *massive* reduction in points (from 40 to 33) they're now definitely usable, and fill an important hole in jump lists.

Priests are no longer really necessary, but can make elite units both much more survivable and more effective in CC. I think a couple of units of BA bike units with a priest attached might be genuinely competitive.

Their troop choices are, at worst, no worse the C:SM. And frankly, 10 pts to make a Rhino fast (5 pts cheaper than it used to be) is *good*. And either way, I think most BA lists will be taking minimal troops as objective sitters anyway.

I guess the av13 spam and objective secured land raiders went away. Frankly, those were never really competitive or fluffy, so *meh*.

Baal predators, completely inexplicably, got worse. I have no idea. I'll give you that one.

The net is that I can see a few wildly different list styles being completely viable. You can build lists around DC jump infantry, fast rhinos, alpha strike/drop pod lists, bikes and priests, and many (many) interesting ally options.

It's hard to see what's not to like!

 Thud wrote:

 UnadoptedPuppy wrote:
Man I gotta leave this thread. I don't know if it's ignorance, resist to change, or just plain internet hate, but I can't understand how people don't see the great stuff this codex has to offer.

You could do that, or you could back up your argument.

What's a good list? Pick a normal points level (1500, 1750, or 1850) that you're the most comfortable with and show how you think this is a good codex. It doesn't have to be perfect, or the future netlist of the Blood Angels, just a list that isn't a complete joke when going up against the other good lists out there. I'm not trying to trap you to score a cheap rhetoric point, I'm genuinely curious to what you envision as your army when you describe this codex as full of great stuff. All I'm able to come up with is either complete garbage, or Codex Space Marines -1. And there's nothing I want more right now than to be proven wrong.

I understand exactly what you're saying, but I won't try and create a hypothetically competitive list when I haven't had a chance to flesh out the dex on the table for more than two games. For the very same reason I don't think you can write all your lists off as C:SM -1.

Check out the discussion going on in the tactics forum if you're genuinely curious as to what you'll see in most BA lists.

I bought the digital version today out of curiosity. I regret the $55 I spent.

I don't see why the Ultramarines don't have their own codex

Well, having played a game today against an armored focused forgeworld Crimson fist marine list, I absolutely love the army wide Furious charge, +1 Initiative, AND the +1WS chalice. Baring any bad rolls, you can really wreck another marine unit. All my sgts from now on, be they ASM, or simple Tac, are going to be rocking a power weapon, and maybe a Grav pistol.

With the +1s to Init, FC, and a H.Flame, even the TAC unit become assaulty. Throw them in their fast rhino, and damn...

I am disappointed over the Dropping of ASM, and DC as troops, and how I can no longer have a bunch of priests/chaplains. However, with all the previously mentioned abilities, your other squads can pick up the slack.

Johnnytorrance wrote:
I bought the digital version today out of curiosity. I regret the $55 I spent.

I don't see why the Ultramarines don't have their own codex

The digital versions are a terrible deal for the price :(

If they were like, $30, I'd actually buy them -- perhaps even in addition to the paper ones. But then again, I don't like e-books very much in general. I get it when people say they don't have space for books and all, though. I just wish electronic books that cost less to produce and distribute, and are non-transferable were cheaper, both generally speaking and specifically with regards to Games Workshop.

Edit: Ultramarines -- I always assumed the C:SM was "their" codex.

 Guardsmen Bob wrote:
Well, having played a game today against an armored focused forgeworld Crimson fist marine list, I absolutely love the army wide Furious charge, +1 Initiative, AND the +1WS chalice. Baring any bad rolls, you can really wreck another marine unit. All my sgts from now on, be they ASM, or simple Tac, are going to be rocking a power weapon, and maybe a Grav pistol.

With the +1s to Init, FC, and a H.Flame, even the TAC unit become assaulty. Throw them in their fast rhino, and damn...

This is a large part of what happened in 3rd and 4th edition. Naked tactical squads with a power weapon rhino-rushing around so that they could ignore their bolters entirely and try to charge into melee. Some people complained that it didn't feel right for tactical marines to be doing this. Assault marines as troops.

 Torga_DW wrote:
I think what people are looking for isn't necessarily stronger marines but *different* marines. When you have 1000 chapters and 2 of them are significantly different then there may be a problem with how their codexes are being created. Especially when there are so many of them (marine armies) compared to the other factions. This leads to "well army x is pretty much army y+1".

Wasn't that kind of the idea, though? There's 1000 chapters, but because of the Codex Astartes that everyone must adhere to, the vast majority of them have similar organization and tactics. So they kinda are all the same, but GW started splitting some of them off into separate books because they needed an excuse to fit a Marine release in between every other release. They're just another opportunity to pimp their (allegedly) best-selling faction.

Honestly, I don't think there is any way to "fix" this situation without pissing people off. If you keep them all separate and preserve that "flavor" that people like, then they'll complain because the codex isn't a 100% copy/paste job of Codex: Space Marines with the "extras" tacked on, or in other words, Space Marines +1. "Vanilla Marines have (unit/wargear/rule) and I DON'T/mine's DIFFERENT! WHY?!", which is exactly the kinda crap you used to hear from Dark Angels and Black Templars players. You can't roll them into the main codex because then the divergent chapters aren't "special" anymore, which enrages the people who play them and in some cases makes them sell their armies on and leave the game, because they were attracted to that chapter in the first place because GW told them they were "special". But if you appease the whiners and give them everything the regular vanilla codex has plus their unique units, characters, relics etc., which like I said before is normally what you see people asking for because it "doesn't make sense" for Blood Angels, Dark Angels etc. to not have this or that, then you've essentially just made Codex: Space Marines entirely useless as the divergent chapters are now instantly better, literally having everything they have and then some.

How do you fix that, without either making everyone the same generic Space Marines with the same rules and units (Which is how it probably should have always been, with the only thing differentiating BA from DA from SW etc. being a color scheme and maybe a general preference for a certain unit or tactic...you know, like practically every other faction in the game! Even all the Chaos Legions share a single codex and the supplements barely change anything), or making the snowflakes so special and awesome that no one buys the generic Marines anymore?

But wouldn't the chapter tactics and SM specials HQs still make the sm codex good? Sure the DA can make a bike army, but a WS one with their superior rules is a better one. Even if technicly DAs have more biker flavored units.

That's one of the issues; being able to do a bike army at all makes DA players unhappy as that's one of their specialties, but doing it better? "Ugh, why play DA then, we're just SM-1."

If everyone used the same book, then every biker Marine army would be equally competitive. But then you'd lose all that DA "flavor"...what that is exactly, I don't know, because all I ever see is whining about how DA are always inferior and how they've been a gak army for like three editions straight.

 Sidstyler wrote:
That's one of the issues; being able to do a bike army at all makes DA players unhappy as that's one of their specialties, but doing it better? "Ugh, why play DA then, we're just SM-1."

If everyone used the same book, then every biker Marine army would be equally competitive. But then you'd lose all that DA "flavor"...what that is exactly, I don't know, because all I ever see is whining about how DA are always inferior and how they've been a gak army for like three editions straight.

Except that's not even true. If everyone used the same book, then every biker Marine army would be equally competitive, except the chapters whose chapter tactics made bikers better. If Dark Angels were rolled into C:SM, they would still get chapter tactics, special characters, maybe even a special unit if they actually need one, to make them unique. They would have access to everything the other chapters get, plus rules to set them apart, and be SM+1 instead of SM-1. At that point, whether a Ravenwing force is superior to a White Scars force would still depend on the exact special rules they get, but at least the comparison would be fair, because they'd be equal in all other respects.

I honestly believe Dark Angels have suffered greatly by not being part of C:SM. They seem to be used as a test-bed marine codex, and as a result they always end up with inferior rules. What works in their codex gets ported over to the next edition of C:SM, and they never end up getting the new goodies in the vanilla codex. Instead they get weird, ugly new unique units that never existed before in the fluff and don't work on the table to boot.

ok, that's (sadly) correct: if you give the "special coloured" SM something more, the "standard coloured" SM get disappointed they got less
however, if you give the "special coloured" SM less, (or equal), they get disappointed 'cause they are only special coloured version of the same marine

solution: there is no really a solution, everything you do there will always be someone disappointing.
however, you can do something to give "special coloured" marine something *different*, not being SM+1 nor SM-1

for instance
THIS IS JUST FOR INSTANCE DON'T ARGUE ABOUT IT
for instance you state RedMarines got more rapid moving assault marine than vanilla ones; thus far you can give them the abilities to move and charge with jp or to charge from deep strike.
however, they are focused to assault so they get no lascannon nor heavy bolter
or give them assault marine as troops and tactical marine as elite
you did'nt change almost anything BUT you have a different army 'cause they will need to go assault and lack the long range firepower (or flexibility) standard marine got

GreenMarines can get more flavoured bikes and can equip with bikes every unit. However maybe they have not assault marine nor flying vehicles...

just my two cents

It's possible to have trade offs instead of just making 1 book better than the other. And if a chapter is going to be a divergent codex, then by god make it a divergent codex.

Chomskie wrote:
I actually really like the codex, and frankly don't understand what all the complaining is about. Honestly, I'm at a loss. This has, by far, the most flavor and variety of any 7th ed. codex and is absolutely competitive with builds from codex space marines.

I'd guess most lists will be running their codex detachment (baal something or other). This gives all units +1 initiative on the turn they charge. Since all infantry units now have furious charge, this means BA have *army wide* S5 I5 attacks on the charge, *without priests!*. That clearly differentiates them from other SM chapters, and sets the tone for the codex as a whole.

So what are the other changes?

ASM are no longer troops, but since the codex detachment gives up objective secured anyway ... zero &^%@S given? They also got significantly cheaper and get two specials in a 5 man unit. Five ASM with 2x melta and a sarge with dual inferno pistols in a drop pod comes out to 135 points of problem solving win.

Want to run an army with choppy jump infantry? Cool. Paint 'em black. Or their shoulders at least, who cares. Death Company are now terrifying. 23 pts a model with 5 S5/I5 attacks on the charge, FnP and jump infantry, is *amazingly* good. If they could get melta bombs, every BA list would need 4x15 of these. Without melta bombs, they're still fantastic. Sanguinary guard still seem like sort of a hard unit to make work, but with a *massive* reduction in points (from 40 to 33) they're now definitely usable, and fill an important hole in jump lists.

Priests are no longer really necessary, but can make elite units both much more survivable and more effective in CC. I think a couple of units of BA bike units with a priest attached might be genuinely competitive.

Their troop choices are, at worst, no worse the C:SM. And frankly, 10 pts to make a Rhino fast (5 pts cheaper than it used to be) is *good*. And either way, I think most BA lists will be taking minimal troops as objective sitters anyway.

I guess the av13 spam and objective secured land raiders went away. Frankly, those were never really competitive or fluffy, so *meh*.

Baal predators, completely inexplicably, got worse. I have no idea. I'll give you that one.

The net is that I can see a few wildly different list styles being completely viable. You can build lists around DC jump infantry, fast rhinos, alpha strike/drop pod lists, bikes and priests, and many (many) interesting ally options.

It's hard to see what's not to like!

Thank you for this. Exalted, sir!

I agree with everything you said except that baals got worse. They lost scout, but a baal pred with sponsons took a 10 point reduction, which is pretty ok with me. My list yesterday at 1850 had a priest with jump pack, power sword, bolt pistol and finkin kap, a libby lvl2 with galliens staff and sanguinary powers (also jump pack), 8 death co with packs and various upgrades, 5 sang guard with various upgrades and a banner, 5 tacs with melta+combi in a pod, cassor the damned, 2x10 melta assault marines, 2x baal preds and a raven. I lost, mainly due to tactical errors (actually, it was ALL tactical errors), but the army performed very well and was an absolute blast.

I don't know what some of you guys don't understand about the fact that the complaints HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH POWER LEVEL. The folks like myself complaining would be equally pissed if this dex had been the Astartes eldar. The bungling of force org and inability to run a themed CAD army is what we are pissed about. No more DoA, no more DC armies, no more Mech Angels,, just red ultramarines with some black space marines. Oooh look, and some gold space marines too. Problem is, that the blue ultramarines at least have the new Astartes tech and tge CT. We get a buff that helps our CC ability 50% of the time.

I like the codex there is a degree of separation from C:SM but that separation was always going to be progressively decreased across all codexes as GW aligned all the loyalist codexes for points and abilities.

There is enough separation to make BA distinctive but they are certainly separate.

The BA always adhered to the astartes chapters org so no surprise there. They were always faster and stronger in combat, well they are now.

Throw what you know of FOC and this codexes apparent restrictions/similarities to C:SM out the window . Its all about this chart and what will drop next week.

50%.. And what do you consider a themed CAD-army: ASM-spam, DC-spam, AV13-spam?
That's not a theme, that is just spamming the same unit over and over.

If you take Dante, you still have all your DoA. So what exactly is the issue?
Or don't you play Dante in a themed army?

 Sidstyler wrote:
Wasn't that kind of the idea, though? There's 1000 chapters, but because of the Codex Astartes that everyone must adhere to, the vast majority of them have similar organization and tactics. So they kinda are all the same, but GW started splitting some of them off into separate books because they needed an excuse to fit a Marine release in between every other release. They're just another opportunity to pimp their (allegedly) best-selling faction.

Honestly, I don't think there is any way to "fix" this situation without pissing people off. If you keep them all separate and preserve that "flavor" that people like, then they'll complain because the codex isn't a 100% copy/paste job of Codex: Space Marines with the "extras" tacked on, or in other words, Space Marines +1. "Vanilla Marines have (unit/wargear/rule) and I DON'T/mine's DIFFERENT! WHY?!", which is exactly the kinda crap you used to hear from Dark Angels and Black Templars players. You can't roll them into the main codex because then the divergent chapters aren't "special" anymore, which enrages the people who play them and in some cases makes them sell their armies on and leave the game, because they were attracted to that chapter in the first place because GW told them they were "special". But if you appease the whiners and give them everything the regular vanilla codex has plus their unique units, characters, relics etc., which like I said before is normally what you see people asking for because it "doesn't make sense" for Blood Angels, Dark Angels etc. to not have this or that, then you've essentially just made Codex: Space Marines entirely useless as the divergent chapters are now instantly better, literally having everything they have and then some.

How do you fix that, without either making everyone the same generic Space Marines with the same rules and units (Which is how it probably should have always been, with the only thing differentiating BA from DA from SW etc. being a color scheme and maybe a general preference for a certain unit or tactic...you know, like practically every other faction in the game! Even all the Chaos Legions share a single codex and the supplements barely change anything), or making the snowflakes so special and awesome that no one buys the generic Marines anymore?

I don't disagree with what you're saying. I think it comes down to "they needed an excuse to fit a marine release in" which isn't a good way to release game rules. The thing is, people are getting enraged and selling their armies the way things are going. This ties into their decline in sales, which i'd rather not talk about in relation to this but sort of have to illustrate my point. For the price they're charging for books ($83 a codex here in australia), releasing something that is so similar to another book for the same price isn't good. Especially when it involves invalidating the previous builds. Its not about giving them the regular vanilla codex +1, it's about giving them divergence.

To try and quantify what i'm saying, as a blood angel player from way back i've never thought that having 'fast' tanks should be a blood angel thing, it should have been a white scar thing. The problem with it is when you give those marines the option for a tank company (which the last ba codex did) it suddenly becomes +1. I wasn't a fan of blood angels being 'the tank company codex' either, but at least they had an identity then. I think the problem is the 'identity' of the army is lacking, something that comes from the rules not the unit selections. The most consistent identity i've seen in blood angels so far is that they're a 'furious charge' army. I think the lack of direction in codex design for marines is a problem - each new reboot they think something up on the fly instead of having a cohesive vision for what each army should be and do. Writers come and go, but the overall vision should remain the same. The only vision i see is "they needed an excuse to fit a marine release in", and hey good for them. But i'm not interested in chasing that dragon, there's no substance in it.

Kangodo wrote:
50%.. And what do you consider a themed CAD-army: ASM-spam, DC-spam, AV13-spam?
That's not a theme, that is just spamming the same unit over and over.

If you take Dante, you still have all your DoA. So what exactly is the issue?
Or don't you play Dante in a themed army?

You say spam, I say theme. And I don'teven own Dante so no, I never played with him. But thx for reminding me. Another themed list invalidated. Dante and his golden boys.

But oh, boo right. That was just spamming Sanguinary guard...


Keep drinking the kool-aid, it must taste good. Not any less toxic, though chief.