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.

Darsath wrote:
People are more than likely being overly negative about the Dark Angels release and its impact on the game. But, it seems to be a symptom of a much larger problem. Seems to have little to do with people not liking Dark Angels, and more the exhaustion of Space Marine releases as a whole. Just speculation though.

There is some of that. The only thing you need to make DA as functional as any other chapter is a chapter tactic and their special units...which could just be included in the space marine codex. Instead...they do this...and a codex that could be drakari or CWE or orks...is another stupid supplement.

It is also idiotic. I am not buying that. It pleases so few. Plus ofc...the competitive players that just pick up what is OP.

 Xenomancers wrote:


Marines aren't even a top 3 army in competitive play.
Sisters
Daemons
Harliquens
and Custodes

win more games than marines do.

Marines a solid army right now. No question about it. As long as those armies above are doing better than marines are though. You have no place to complain about marines. It is actually quite logical though to attack this DA release. They get rules that other marines don't get...as well as all the special rules that come from being in a marine dex....at the cost of 0. It literally can't get more obvious than that. It is unarguably unfair.

So it is very simple...If you think marines are OP right now...you must certainly think giving them army wide access...for free...of pretty much the best stratagem in the space marine codex. 4+ max to wound for the cost of nothing (but picking the units you want to take anyways) is much more OP.

See you just said things that aren't true.

Space Marines -
2,812 games
51% win
58% first turn
43% second turn

Dark Angels
614 games
50% win
54% first turn
45% second turn

Space Marines are better than DA even when DA had Inner Circle termies.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:


Marines aren't even a top 3 army in competitive play.
Sisters
Daemons
Harliquens
and Custodes

win more games than marines do.

Marines a solid army right now. No question about it. As long as those armies above are doing better than marines are though. You have no place to complain about marines. It is actually quite logical though to attack this DA release. They get rules that other marines don't get...as well as all the special rules that come from being in a marine dex....at the cost of 0. It literally can't get more obvious than that. It is unarguably unfair.

So it is very simple...If you think marines are OP right now...you must certainly think giving them army wide access...for free...of pretty much the best stratagem in the space marine codex. 4+ max to wound for the cost of nothing (but picking the units you want to take anyways) is much more OP.

See you just said things that aren't true.

Space Marines -
2,812 games
51% win
58% first turn
43% second turn

Dark Angels
614 games
50% win
54% first turn
45% second turn

Space Marines are better than DA even when DA had Inner Circle termies.

I didn't say anything about DA. I was talking about space marines.

Clearly something is off. Having more free rules should not result in a lower win rate. Plus the majority if not all of that data was collected BEFORE terminators went to 3 wounds in the new marine codex - which is a big difference. Need it all in context anyways. What are the data ranges. Do we have the data just from when terms went to 3 wounds? IDK. Maybe when Eradicators are that OP...it doesn't matter how good terms are...and those dont help DA at all. Erads now nerfed. Lots have changed and honestly - errads still need more nerfing.

 Xenomancers wrote:

I didn't say anything about DA. I was talking about space marines.

Ok fine - you win this round Xeeenoooooo!

 Xenomancers wrote:
Clearly something is off. Having more free rules should not result in a lower win rate. Plus the majority if not all of that data was collected BEFORE terminators went to 3 wounds in the new marine codex - which is a big difference. Need it all in context anyways. What are the data ranges. Do we have the data just from when terms went to 3 wounds? IDK. Maybe when Eradicators are that OP...it doesn't matter how good terms are...and those dont help DA at all. Erads now nerfed. Lots have changed and honestly - errads still need more nerfing.

Eradicators aren't being spammed at the high end, so we can nix that idea right now.

As for what's causing the low win rates and play rates for DA, I have a few ideas worth considering:

1) White Scars do bikes close to as well as Dark Angles do and thus nobody was going to switch armies for a very minor sidegrade. This is the same argument to make for other tough armies simply being close enough to DW that people didn't switch.
2) Dark Angels have all their power locked behind expensive units (the Knights both DW and RW for example) and due to other limitations can't fully bring this power to bear.
3) People knew the codex was coming soon, remember we expect this out a month ago and didn't want to run placeholder rules for an army that wasn't utterly broken.

Now that the last reason is out of the way I expect that to cause reason 1 to be less of an issue so we can get a better read on their true place in the meta.

I find really fun that GW (possibly by chance, since I don't trust their skills) removed the only combo that would make DW oppressive and most player didn't even noticed, since they where busy watching the sky falling.

Particularly towards the less skilled portion of competitive crowd, I think that DW generate a lot of salt because it messes with the mindset or assured destruction, return on investment for killing and such.
Because all their disadvantage requires to move tactically, exploit their foot slogging and small number, many simple think they have none because "if you can't kill them, you lose".
For once I like that durability is so central rather than kill power (because, since many speak about IH, you seem to miss that IH were strong on defense, but also very strong on offense with no lack of manouvrability).

Anyway, DW won't be particularly strong, but at that point, very far away in time due to Covid, many will ascribe it to the Codex creep and not the fact that even if the game is shallow, the analysis made by the player is shallower.

BTW the combo was the Pennant of Remembrance. The old version with 5+++ was oppressive.
You know why? Because it boosted their durability against small arms, against which DW now get nothing (apart from a pricey 6+++... And the Apothecary which, yes, is good). Shoot with a S4 weapon and their trait don't even exist. 4+ is not a bad chance to wound.
The new version with -1D instead (is that right?) is ok, boost their durability vs the weapons that you shouldn't fire at them anyway. They're now good, starting from abysmal. Do not shoot your AT to them and you will be fine.

I would change a permanent Transhuman with advance+charge, fall back+charge or +1 Damage on turn 3+ in an heartbeat.
Also many seem to miss that the best part of the stratagem is that you pop it when needed and screw you opponent (the part that I really hate about Stratagem: they are strategical as a backstab).
In DW case you opponent should be in an already tight position in order to screw themself willingly.

 Cybtroll wrote:
I find really fun that GW (possibly by chance, since I don't trust their skills) removed the only combo that would make DW oppressive and most player didn't even noticed, since they where busy watching the sky falling.

Particularly towards the less skilled portion of competitive crowd, I think that DW generate a lot of salt because it messes with the mindset or assured destruction, return on investment for killing and such.
Because all their disadvantage requires to move tactically, exploit their foot slogging and small number, many simple think they have none because "if you can't kill them, you lose".
For once I like that durability is so central rather than kill power (because, since many speak about IH, you seem to miss that IH were strong on defense, but also very strong on offense with no lack of manouvrability).

Anyway, DW won't be particularly strong, but at that point, very far away in time due to Covid, many will ascribe it to the Codex creep and not the fact that even if the game is shallow, the analysis made by the player is shallower.

BTW the combo was the Pennant of Remembrance. The old version with 5+++ was oppressive.
You know why? Because it boosted their durability against small arms, against which DW now get nothing (apart from a pricey 6+++... And the Apothecary which, yes, is good). Shoot with a S4 weapon and their trait don't even exist. 4+ is not a bad chance to wound.
The new version with -1D instead (is that right?) is ok, boost their durability vs the weapons that you shouldn't fire at them anyway. They're now good, starting from abysmal. Do not shoot your AT to them and you will be fine.

I would change a permanent Transhuman with advance+charge, fall back+charge or +1 Damage on turn 3+ in an heartbeat.
Also many seem to miss that the best part of the stratagem is that you pop it when needed and screw you opponent (the part that I really hate about Stratagem: they are strategical as a backstab).
In DW case you opponent should be in an already tight position in order to screw themself willingly.

You do realize you're not JUST getting Transhuman right?

 Cybtroll wrote:
I find really fun that GW (possibly by chance, since I don't trust their skills) removed the only combo that would make DW oppressive and most player didn't even noticed, since they where busy watching the sky falling.

Particularly towards the less skilled portion of competitive crowd, I think that DW generate a lot of salt because it messes with the mindset or assured destruction, return on investment for killing and such.
Because all their disadvantage requires to move tactically, exploit their foot slogging and small number, many simple think they have none because "if you can't kill them, you lose".
For once I like that durability is so central rather than kill power (because, since many speak about IH, you seem to miss that IH were strong on defense, but also very strong on offense with no lack of manouvrability).

Anyway, DW won't be particularly strong, but at that point, very far away in time due to Covid, many will ascribe it to the Codex creep and not the fact that even if the game is shallow, the analysis made by the player is shallower.

BTW the combo was the Pennant of Remembrance. The old version with 5+++ was oppressive.
You know why? Because it boosted their durability against small arms, against which DW now get nothing (apart from a pricey 6+++... And the Apothecary which, yes, is good). Shoot with a S4 weapon and their trait don't even exist. 4+ is not a bad chance to wound.
The new version with -1D instead (is that right?) is ok, boost their durability vs the weapons that you shouldn't fire at them anyway. They're now good, starting from abysmal. Do not shoot your AT to them and you will be fine.

I would change a permanent Transhuman with advance+charge, fall back+charge or +1 Damage on turn 3+ in an heartbeat.
Also many seem to miss that the best part of the stratagem is that you pop it when needed and screw you opponent (the part that I really hate about Stratagem: they are strategical as a backstab).
In DW case you opponent should be in an already tight position in order to screw themself willingly.

You missed that they also lost Combined Assault and can no longer drop a group of Terminators within 6" of the enemy. Honestly, losing that hurts at least as much as the 5+++ banner.

 Da Boss wrote:
I'm honestly not that bothered about which colour space marines are currently the most over powered. Just paint your dudes green if you want these buffs, no problem.

Actually, white

 Cybtroll wrote:
I find really fun that GW (possibly by chance, since I don't trust their skills) removed the only combo that would make DW oppressive and most player didn't even noticed, since they where busy watching the sky falling.

Particularly towards the less skilled portion of competitive crowd, I think that DW generate a lot of salt because it messes with the mindset or assured destruction, return on investment for killing and such.
Because all their disadvantage requires to move tactically, exploit their foot slogging and small number, many simple think they have none because "if you can't kill them, you lose".
For once I like that durability is so central rather than kill power (because, since many speak about IH, you seem to miss that IH were strong on defense, but also very strong on offense with no lack of manouvrability).

Anyway, DW won't be particularly strong, but at that point, very far away in time due to Covid, many will ascribe it to the Codex creep and not the fact that even if the game is shallow, the analysis made by the player is shallower.

BTW the combo was the Pennant of Remembrance. The old version with 5+++ was oppressive.
You know why? Because it boosted their durability against small arms, against which DW now get nothing (apart from a pricey 6+++... And the Apothecary which, yes, is good). Shoot with a S4 weapon and their trait don't even exist. 4+ is not a bad chance to wound.
The new version with -1D instead (is that right?) is ok, boost their durability vs the weapons that you shouldn't fire at them anyway. They're now good, starting from abysmal. Do not shoot your AT to them and you will be fine.

I would change a permanent Transhuman with advance+charge, fall back+charge or +1 Damage on turn 3+ in an heartbeat.
Also many seem to miss that the best part of the stratagem is that you pop it when needed and screw you opponent (the part that I really hate about Stratagem: they are strategical as a backstab).
In DW case you opponent should be in an already tight position in order to screw themself willingly.

My biggest issue with oh these units get transhuman for free is it's yet another GW design duck up they keep inventing ever more ways to make taking any actual fairly costed ie not melta anti tank weapons utterly ridiculous.
First is was the wounding table BS.

Oh a battle cannon S8 AP-2 D3 seems a good thing to shoot a terminators oh except instead of wounding on 2's try 4's now.
A BS3 Battlecannon avarages 1.5 wounds no SS or cover
Your ironically better of with heavy bolter spam.
3 BS heavy bolters actually does 2 damage.

Okay so we shall shoot them at the dreadnaughts oh wait nope now your damage -1.

Oh you brought s4 Ap0 1D weapons hope you dont pay more than 1 point per attack if you want to kill terminators point for point.

Okey. How often were termintors used without auto transhuman in 8th ed, and how valid were termintor only armies, before DA got their new rule set?

GW made a base of a specific DA build valid now, and fixed a unit that was bad in prior edition. How is that bad? And if yes, then what decides that making some unit good is okey for some army, and isn't good other.

Karol wrote:
Okey. How often were termintors used without auto transhuman in 8th ed, and how valid were termintor only armies, before DA got their new rule set?

GW made a base of a specific DA build valid now, and fixed a unit that was bad in prior edition. How is that bad? And if yes, then what decides that making some unit good is okey for some army, and isn't good other.

8th edition guess what they had 2W which was also the same as 90% of marines so they only really got the same save as an intercessor in cover for double the points so they weren't great.

They got 3W in 9th and a strategum to hit on 2+, saying what about X or Y in 8th is about as meaningful to the discussion of balance in 9th as the colour of the carpet in the oval office.

I dont really think the obsec terminators etc really needed to make shooting high strength ie the ones with ap and D3+ weapons at them any worse than it already was.
Especially when plenty of us are looking at seeing the second year of the edition before our Codex's.

Ironically Covid is probably doing GW a favour by hiding how utter rubbish the balance is currently.

so let me get this straight you would want marines to have their rules reverted to their 8th ed version. Lose the extra wounds, lost the extra rules and stratagems etc? Because we all have seen what happens to marines, and even more specific marine builds like DW armies, in 8th ed.

The new rules make the DW termintors a valid option to play. It makes it fun for DA players who liked they armies. They don't seem to be unbalanced vs armies with a 9th ed codex.

Or is this again this need for marin codex to be balanced vs factions that don't have a new book yet, so that when the new book for non marine factions comes out, marines are double as worse ? Where is the unbalance with DA, when the top 3 win % armies aren't marines, and a good chunk of marines don't evne have a 50% win ratio.

If anything more armies should be like DA. To allow multiple builds and multiple lists to be build , and be fun for the people who actually play the list.

Ice_can wrote:
how utter rubbish the balance is currently.

How do you define the line for utter rubbish?

Jesus nothing I posted says they need to go back to 8th edition rules. Just read the post and stop teying to add inflexction and supposition that the poster hasn't included.

My complaint is that once again GW has handed out rules that devalues bringin actual anti tank weapons to use against tacrical dreadnaught aka walking tank armour.

That we now have yet another area where mid strength multi damage weapons are more efficent to shoot at the target.
Like why bring dark lances when you can bring disintegrators.

Why bring lascannons when heacy bolters work better against everything but dreadnaughts and deathguard.

Also god help any drukari subfaction who's benifit is +1 to wound with poison weapons vrs darkangles. They will rightly be saying it's trash, while nid player's are getring rofl stomped by them.

GW game designer's sinply do not have the skill required to balance the multiple implications of impacting the wounding chart.

Ice_can wrote:

They got 3W in 9th and a strategum to hit on 2+

Small point of order, they had the Strategem in 8th (Fury of the First for default termis)

But on the topic DW, the rule set feels pretty egregious - but as others have said that might be due to marine fatigue. I only use marines, and I am tired of their releases. It makes the game have an incredibly unstable ruleset when rules just keep getting piled on. I'm okay with experimentation of rules. It's how we get fun and interesting new mechanics into the game, but the other side of that is the requirement to refine those interesting rules. And GW has just kept piling on rules after rules for marines (such to the point that I can't remember them all, despite being able to throughout most of 8th) without nearly enough refinement (or removal) of rules. Its lead to this janky use of design space that just ends up bloating the game.

DW may not even be that strong when everything shakes out, but it feels bad because its just more special rules for a super-speshul marine unit. In the end my chapter will benefit from a supplement like this, but its just bad for game health. At least finish the Xeno Codices first for feths sake.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Ice_can wrote:
how utter rubbish the balance is currently.

How do you define the line for utter rubbish?

As someone who no longer owns a single Marine or matine alike faction pretty easily. 9th edition especially with the point's changes in the MFM 2020.

Still no word on either of my armies having a 9th edition codex

Each version of space marine has units that shine with their doctrines/abilities, that's nothing new. For years, DAs had rules that benefited Greenwing and static gunlines, while sucking for Ravenwing and Deathwing (nobody took terminators anyway).

As much as some people hate snowflake chapters, Dark Angels, to many people, are not just a single army. They are 3 armies in one. People want or have wanted to play Ravenwing as a solo force, same with Deathwing. This makes them somewhat unique among SM chapters (BA have Death Company I guess), but it's been a thing for many years, and you can deny it's existence all you want, but the fact is it's true.

In the first time in years, GW have now given them the opportunity to run as separate entities without being heavily penalized in CPs or obsec. Yes, it's snowflakey, but it's not without history. We've had this before, obsec bikes and terminators in Ravenwing and Deathwing armies. It certainly doesn't bring these armies to the top of the competitive scene, it usually just leans favourably to the fluff bunnies out there.

So, with that aside, what has GW given them that makes them so obtuse.

Chapter tactic. 1 model flees. How many SM players worry about Ld? OK, so ignore this one. +1 to hit while stationary. Absolute pants for Ravenwing (they can use it, but then they lose Jink). Deathwing need to be in the middle of the board to do it's magic. So they can walk (2 turns of moving at the least), Deepstrike..2nd turn at earliest, probably still have to move. Or they travel in a stormraven or land raider (yeah, not in melta land they don't). So they might be static for 2 turns of the game, possibly 3. It does help offset the powerfist negatives if charged, but again, it's not something you are going to build your list around, not like other chapters.

OK, super doctrine. DA got 3 parts, clearly highlighting each aspect of the army (told you, GW sees them as 3 separate elements). Devastator favours Ravenwing,Tactical favours greenwing, and Assault favours Deathwing. Granted, a full combined arms can make use of all 3 but you usually saw DA armies with at most 2 of the wings, if not just 1.

Ravenwing get a boost in Turn one, maybe also turn 2 if you have a warlord with Brilliant strategist who rolls back the doctrine for a turn. After that, they're done.
Deathwing have to wait til turn 3 or 4, but since that's when a lot of assault is going to be happening anyway, it suits them just fine.

Ravenwing can also get obsec bikes and outriders if taken in a RW Outrider detachment (not the only army with obsec bikes/outriders btw)
Deathwing get obsec terminators if taken in a DW Vanguard detachment (also, not the only obsec terminators)
These are nice boosts and make solo Deathwing and Ravenwing armies viable, which is what DA players have wanted for years.

On top of the above, both RW and DW get additional benefits (Jink and Inner Circle). These rules are not costed and I believe this is the only place where people are complaining, right? If they just got all of the other stuff above, then there would be no complaints. Or, otoh, if they paid just a few more points for these rules, I'm sure nobody would complain either. Thing is, they used to, when they had their own codex. But now, since all things have consolidated, that's gone away.

I played both RW heavy and DW heavy lists a few weeks ago with the index. Jink was different as my bikes and ATVs didn't get it, now they do. They still have severe weaknesses. Their small unit size makes screening characters very, very difficult. As a solo army, there are weaknesses to exploit for sure.
Deathwing were great with Transhuman, but they still fell to weight of fire and fall to MW just as well as any elite force. I'd actually like to see transhuman on all terminators personally, they felt right for the first time in many years (decades?).

I don't see this as broken yet, as any effective Dark Angels army will have trouble balancing all of it's many benefits (I ran out of points really fast). They will be a force to be reckoned with however, but let's see what lists are made first that puts them over the edge.

So this is one disjointed ramble (been a long day, brain is fried), but just trying to address the many issues at hand. I want to play some games first to see how bad they really are, or is it just something that looks great on paper, but then falls apart when put into action.

I'm not sad that DAs are finally a good chapter, God knows they have sucked for a long time, but hopefully GW didn't swing the pendulum too far.

Oh, and let's not forget that DW do have a downside regarding falling back, but it's hardly ever going to come up and nothing you can build around (basically how DW players felt before about their rules that helped vs Fallen, lol)

"What has GW given them that makes them so obtuse" Literally writes paragraphs upon paragraphs discussing passive buffs heaped upon the army.

Word Bearers passive buffs assessed to be sufficient two years ago while developing Marines 2.0: Reroll Failed Morale

There has been no sign that non Loyalists will be getting the volume of Passives, Warlord Traits, Relics, Spell Lores, Strategems etc.

That's why I'm still irate and sceptical of returning not being an exercise in futility in the face of game imbalancing favouritism.

 Eldarain wrote:
"What has GW given them that makes them so obtuse" Literally writes paragraphs upon paragraphs discussing passive buffs heaped upon the army.

Word Bearers passive buffs assessed to be sufficient two years ago while developing Marines 2.0: Reroll Failed Morale

There has been no sign that non Loyalists will be getting the volume of Passives, Warlord Traits, Relics, Spell Lores, Strategems etc.

That's why I'm still irate and sceptical of returning not being an exercise in futility in the face of game imbalancing favouritism.

mate, don't get me started on Chaos...I have Iron warriors too, I want them to be dangerous, I really do.

While the buffs to DA seem many, if you broke them down as separate RW, DW and GW buffs, it would be just fine. And having played DA for many years, I can tell you that trying to have all 3 wings effectively in a force is really difficult, if not impossible.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Just curious, anybody put a list together yet that has everyone on board with the obscenity?
And I dont want to hear "book's not out yet" as an excuse as that hasn't stopped the current noise.

I think changing Inner Circle to be wound only 3+ would be a great change and still be powerful.

Gives something to termies that cant get it and means that BGV have a reason to still transhuman.

Other than that everything else seems pretty balanced on the strong side.

There a lot of good rules in the book but rarely will you be able to benefit from all of them which i think is a good balance mechanic.

Blastaar wrote:

Racerguy180 wrote:
Fallen are an army, the entire 1st legion are chaos marines so.....

This "joke" is ancient. And not funny.

Honestly. Its super annoying at this point

I keep hearing/seeing people say you need a Deathwing Vanguard detachment to give all Deathwing units from the base codex Inner Circle... except that's not true. All Deathwing & Inner Circle units in any Dark Angel detachment get Inner Circle.

The Vanguard is needed for ObSec, yes, but not Inner Circle.

It's the same thing for Ravenwing and Jink - you don't need an Outrider for it, they just all get it.

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:
I keep hearing/seeing people say you need a Deathwing Vanguard detachment to give all Deathwing units from the base codex Inner Circle... except that's not true. All Deathwing & Inner Circle units in any Dark Angel detachment get Inner Circle.

The Vanguard is needed for ObSec, yes, but not Inner Circle.

It's the same thing for Ravenwing and Jink - you don't need an Outrider for it, they just all get it.

This is correct. If you're just adding a unit or two to your main army, they won't get all the buffs but still keep those inherent ones.

Does anyone know if Black Knights, RW Apoth/std/champ and Talon Master retain the Inner Circle rule? While not affecting them for transhuman, it does mean that a Deathwing vanguard can still have some fast movers without losing obsec terms (aside from adding a 2nd detachment)

123ply wrote:

Blastaar wrote:

Racerguy180 wrote:
Fallen are an army, the entire 1st legion are chaos marines so.....

This "joke" is ancient. And not funny.

Honestly. Its super annoying at this point

So is squatting, but everyone uses it and it annoys us Squats...get over it.

 bullyboy wrote:

Does anyone know if Black Knights, RW Apoth/std/champ and Talon Master retain the Inner Circle rule? While not affecting them for transhuman, it does mean that a Deathwing vanguard can still have some fast movers without losing obsec terms (aside from adding a 2nd detachment)

They do retain it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:
I keep hearing/seeing people say you need a Deathwing Vanguard detachment to give all Deathwing units from the base codex Inner Circle... except that's not true. All Deathwing & Inner Circle units in any Dark Angel detachment get Inner Circle.

The Vanguard is needed for ObSec, yes, but not Inner Circle.

It's the same thing for Ravenwing and Jink - you don't need an Outrider for it, they just all get it.

We're aware. Obsec and +3CP for the WL.

Who is going to run 3+ units of non-obsec terminators on top of everything else they need to score? SM Terminators don't come with abusive firepower like CSM can. You drop three units in and pop off bolters and fail one or two of the charges then what? Hopefully you didn't take all melee terminators since the book has no charge rerolls or bonuses and they lost combined assault.

I'm sure there will be Greenwing lists using all the facets of the book, but that's a bit different than concerns about an uber unkillable terminator force.

In my experience, DA armies are at their best when they combine all 3 wings.

I'm not worried in the least by a full DW army, it is too easy to outplay. I can see myself easily winning against it with my usual nids, sister and even TS lists, without changing much.

Full DW and RW armies will be nice for non competitive play though.

 Cybtroll wrote:

Also many seem to miss that the best part of the stratagem is that you pop it when needed and screw you opponent (the part that I really hate about Stratagem: they are strategical as a backstab

Just a small aside but other chapter's terminators can't even use Transhuman Physiology at all, so I don't buy the argument that having to spend up to 4CP per turn to protect 1 unit is better or even remotely comparable to having it on all terminator units all the time for free...

Just a quick question for those who know DA better but do your named charictors have the correct keywords to be added to wither a deathwing or ravenwing army without stopping them gaining their obsec non troops?

I'm asking as I think there is definataly potential for a vanguard outrider wing combo force that certainly feels more competitive than friendly.

Ice_can wrote:
Just a quick question for those who know DA better but do your named charictors have the correct keywords to be added to wither a deathwing or ravenwing army without stopping them gaining their obsec non troops?

I'm asking as I think there is definataly potential for a vanguard outrider wing combo force that certainly feels more competitive than friendly.

Yeah Belial for DW and Sammael for RW. They were some of the best DA units in 8th, but IDK about their datasheets for 9th. Belial wasn't used because the units he supported were pretty bad, but re-rolling failed hits for DW was strong.