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.

Karol wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

BA will never be red Ultramarines due to the differences in their army rules and extra units that they Ultramarines can't take. They're basically Vanilla +1.

Now I am not BA or ultramarine expert, but the fact that a unit exists and is chapter specific, does not mean it will get used. If the optimal way to run BAs is the same style of MSU shoting army with only difference being slam cpts instead of Gulliman, then the lists aren't different enough to warrent maybe even the existance of BA as a separate faction.

I get the looks part, or that someone likes the esthetic of something like a Death Company, but if no one uses those, who cares if it is an option in the codex.

I see claims msu shooting is how to run BA, but I've yet to watch batreps of people running them that way. Maybe it's a GT thing or something.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Karol wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

BA will never be red Ultramarines due to the differences in their army rules and extra units that they Ultramarines can't take. They're basically Vanilla +1.

Now I am not BA or ultramarine expert, but the fact that a unit exists and is chapter specific, does not mean it will get used. If the optimal way to run BAs is the same style of MSU shoting army with only difference being slam cpts instead of Gulliman, then the lists aren't different enough to warrent maybe even the existance of BA as a separate faction.

I get the looks part, or that someone likes the esthetic of something like a Death Company, but if no one uses those, who cares if it is an option in the codex.

I see claims msu shooting is how to run BA, but I've yet to watch batreps of people running them that way. Maybe it's a GT thing or something.

Because it's absurd.

Lemondish wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Karol wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

BA will never be red Ultramarines due to the differences in their army rules and extra units that they Ultramarines can't take. They're basically Vanilla +1.

Now I am not BA or ultramarine expert, but the fact that a unit exists and is chapter specific, does not mean it will get used. If the optimal way to run BAs is the same style of MSU shoting army with only difference being slam cpts instead of Gulliman, then the lists aren't different enough to warrent maybe even the existance of BA as a separate faction.

I get the looks part, or that someone likes the esthetic of something like a Death Company, but if no one uses those, who cares if it is an option in the codex.

I see claims msu shooting is how to run BA, but I've yet to watch batreps of people running them that way. Maybe it's a GT thing or something.

Because it's absurd.

Meh, I have a fair bit of MSU in my Blood Angels, since they were originally being built as a Codex Compliant Battle Company with generic characters... But it has seen it's fair share of changes in 8th. All my Assault Squads got converted to Death Company with Boltguns and Chainswords (minus 4 dudes with Power Fists/Thunder Hammers), all my 10 man Tac Squads with special and heavy weapon got changed over to 5 man squads with combi-weapon and special weapon... And I added a slew of named characters to my collection.

If playing mono-BA, ignoring the gunline aspect is even more absurd... Every game I have gone mostly assault has been a train wreck, and every assault heavy mono-BA bat rep I have watched has gone about the same. BA still shoot like EVERY OTHER BS 3+ Marine, so not making use of that stat is stupid. Our relic banner is also ace when you drop a Company Ancient with it in the middle of 3 Devastator Squads, since that 5+ Feel No Pain, tacked on top of the 4+ to shoot in the opponent's turn when they die is amazing in the super 1st turn murder fest that is 8th edition. Throw a Sanguinary Novitiate there in the odd chance he brings back an expensive Devastator with heavy weapon and keep shooting.

Mono BA work great as a combined arms force, and people often call what BA players take a "gunline" when they have anything that shoots instead of having rocket packs strapped to EVERY model and just throwing them at the enemy like a fool.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Karol wrote:

 Phaeron Gukk wrote:

I stand by the costs are half the problem for the army, the other half being the issue all Marines have: a lack of true durability in this edition.

To actually drag this back to the original topic, I think a lot of (uncharacteristically reasonable) dissatisfaction with GW's output is that many armies waited with bated breath for a codex just so their armies could be played functionally, got lumbered with sloppy rules, and now are effectively a few steps behind. Some armies are waiting for new and cool additions to their armies, others are waiting to see how buffs/nerfs are going to shake out, others (namely, marines) are effectively STILL waiting for a (rewritten) codex.

I think that an even bigger problem is that when GW finally did start making characterful marine armies like the BA, later on they did a full 180 to force people in to playing those armies as red ultramarines. I understand that the charge out of deep strike stuff was hurting the tournament meta game. But to be honest I don't know what is worse. Having BA players have fun with a strong BA army, and some other people being salty about it. Or only eldar getting the first child treatment from GW.

BA will never be red Ultramarines due to the differences in their army rules and extra units that they Ultramarines can't take. They're basically Vanilla +1.

Except the majority of the +1s they get and the way their special stuff is designs to work has been shattered into pieces by CA/FAQ, while ultramarines continue to have their own special snowflake stuff BA doesn’t, while being better at shooting, which is apparently all GW cares about in 8th. At this point I’d rather my BA get rolled into the vanilla book anyway since at least that way we could agree we all suck and UM could run Librarian dreads or whatever the hell it is that makes them so jealous.

Bremon wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Karol wrote:

 Phaeron Gukk wrote:

I stand by the costs are half the problem for the army, the other half being the issue all Marines have: a lack of true durability in this edition.

To actually drag this back to the original topic, I think a lot of (uncharacteristically reasonable) dissatisfaction with GW's output is that many armies waited with bated breath for a codex just so their armies could be played functionally, got lumbered with sloppy rules, and now are effectively a few steps behind. Some armies are waiting for new and cool additions to their armies, others are waiting to see how buffs/nerfs are going to shake out, others (namely, marines) are effectively STILL waiting for a (rewritten) codex.

I think that an even bigger problem is that when GW finally did start making characterful marine armies like the BA, later on they did a full 180 to force people in to playing those armies as red ultramarines. I understand that the charge out of deep strike stuff was hurting the tournament meta game. But to be honest I don't know what is worse. Having BA players have fun with a strong BA army, and some other people being salty about it. Or only eldar getting the first child treatment from GW.

BA will never be red Ultramarines due to the differences in their army rules and extra units that they Ultramarines can't take. They're basically Vanilla +1.

Except the majority of the +1s they get and the way their special stuff is designs to work has been shattered into pieces by CA/FAQ, while ultramarines continue to have their own special snowflake stuff BA doesn’t, while being better at shooting, which is apparently all GW cares about in 8th. At this point I’d rather my BA get rolled into the vanilla book anyway since at least that way we could agree we all suck and UM could run Librarian dreads or whatever the hell it is that makes them so jealous.

Where in the FAQ did they take away the +1 to wound?

If you're still crying about the ability to slingshot a Death Company Captain with a Relic Jump Pack over a screening unit turn 1, good friggin' riddance to that nonsense. Positioning should always matter in a game where you move physical models around the table and the fact that you could negate that was dumb. So is building an army that doesn't take some kind of tool to thin screens and then cries when their ability to ignore screens is taken away.

Omg man, I totally forgot about +1 to wound. Melee is the new meta. Thanks for your insight. Total game changer for me. Fact of the matter is UM do what they do well from turn 1, while deep strike and fly nerfs mean BA do it from turn 2 on, and let me know how many CP/points I have left to hit the good stuff after spending enough points and CP on clearing chaff.

And for the record, I’ve never once used a DC smash captain with a relic jump pack. Interesting and telling that you think melee positioning needs to be managed and strategic but shooting not needing to is no problem.

Poor Ultramarines.

Bremon wrote:
Omg man, I totally forgot about +1 to wound. Melee is the new meta. Thanks for your insight. Total game changer for me. Fact of the matter is UM do what they do well from turn 1, while deep strike and fly nerfs mean BA do it from turn 2 on, and let me know how many CP/points I have left to hit the good stuff after spending enough points and CP on clearing chaff.

And for the record, I’ve never once used a DC smash captain with a relic jump pack. Interesting and telling that you think melee positioning needs to be managed and strategic but shooting not needing to is no problem.

Poor Ultramarines.

Ultramarines base trait only benefits them if you charged them and they're stuck in combat then they can psuedo-fly to step out and shoot at -1. It's decent, but it's not doing anything turn 1 unless you dragged the unit into melee turn 1.

Also, I feel positioning should matter for every unit, hence why I often complain about the lack of terrain rules in the game because they were important for positioning. I've also mentioned I want more modifiers for shooting as well. Good terrain scatter and LOS blocking terrain helps assault armies as well. But sure, keep telling me what I believe just because I don't like the way Blood Angels were being played because it negated player interaction on a stupid level.

 Xenomancers wrote:
No new models. Codex release is down to nothing. Good for orkies but this is taking too long anyways.

Where are the sisters of battle...where is ynnari? Where is codex space marines 2.0? Why a new mini game/ board game ever week but no new models?

Come on GW. It's almost like you don't want my money.

Is this sarcasm? I feel like this is sarcasm.

 cvtuttle wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
No new models. Codex release is down to nothing. Good for orkies but this is taking too long anyways.

Where are the sisters of battle...where is ynnari? Where is codex space marines 2.0? Why a new mini game/ board game ever week but no new models?

Come on GW. It's almost like you don't want my money.

Is this sarcasm? I feel like this is sarcasm.

Its trolling