Another "Talk Me Into BA" Post

[Lucumon]

At the risk of heresy, I would suggest you pick up the Dark Eldar codex. It seems to fit the bill except for your irrational affinity to Captains.

[Mudpuppet]

If you feel the need to take a captain due to fluffy "only captains lead armys" reasoning, i would like to point out that quite often religious leaders have also been military leaders in real life history.

 

Thus, for a chapter of ruined, broken, tragic heroes like ours that has a problem with its spirituality it makes perfect fluffy sense for its military doctrine to have spiritual leaders leading military forces.

 

Mudpuppet

[Spagunk]

I have to agree that it sounds like you (as the OP) already made up your mind. Your criteria lists indicate that your decision to build a BA army lies in the captain choice. As such, you're only defining characteristic for any army lies in the captain options. However, one thing you do not take into consideration is that the flavor of BA does not hinge on the captain. It's good for a quick and dirty independant characters but it does not define the chapter. Chaplains have been a defining characteristic as they were boosted past the normal SM version in the 4th ed printerdex (PDF version). The real codex solidified it but increased the cost slightly (and added a good bonus too).

 

Consider this however. The captain has a pretty decent WS and a good BS. This allows you to field a decent combatant for the price. I think it's like 155 or so for a JP captain with meltapistol and power weapon? Given that captains roll for blood rage, they could potentially be a WS6 ST5 I6 (on the charge) close combat giant with an AP1 str8 BS5 pistol shot w/ 5 or more attacks on the charge w/ no armor saves. That's not bad statistically. Add in some extras and you have a dangerous deathstar unit. Is it 100% as effective as a comparable libby or reclusiarch? probably not as they have bonuses that captains cannot replicate. But I think that a 155pt unit isn't too shabby for what they do. Seth would probably be more effective but does not have the jump pack. Tycho is pretty good but he does not have a JP either.

 

In all fairness, they should have kept the ability to grant LD10 to the entire army to keep in line with the other options. However LD10 to was kind of overpowered in some regards. Perhaps they should have limited it to within 12" or 6" with tycho granting it army wide. Who knows. There always is a small chance that it becomes and errata item later in life (100,000,000:1 chance).

[Khavos]

I have to agree that it sounds like you (as the OP) already made up your mind. Your criteria lists indicate that your decision to build a BA army lies in the captain choice.

 

Then I've expressed myself badly. That's part of it, certainly, but not the end-all be-all. BA have several points for them - the possibility of a true assault focus, however competitive, the ability to extensively utilize jump packers, which I like, the ease of creating a DIY and thus not having to stick to a color scheme I'm not fond of - but they also have a couple points against them, only one of which is the weak vanilla captain options.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

Have you considered using Tycho? He is a Captain and has the artificer armor you want. He also has some nice special rules thrown in as well such as DMH.

 

0b :)

[Khavos]

Have you considered using Tycho? He is a Captain and has the artificer armor you want. He also has some nice special rules thrown in as well such as DMH.

 

0b :)

 

He's not terrible - though I'd still take a Wolf Lord over him :) - but unfortunately, no jump pack, and it looks like if I went BA, I'd want to try out the flying circus.

[KhorneHunter57x]

I have to agree that it sounds like you (as the OP) already made up your mind. Your criteria lists indicate that your decision to build a BA army lies in the captain choice.

 

Then I've expressed myself badly. That's part of it, certainly, but not the end-all be-all. BA have several points for them - the possibility of a true assault focus, however competitive, the ability to extensively utilize jump packers, which I like, the ease of creating a DIY and thus not having to stick to a color scheme I'm not fond of - but they also have a couple points against them, only one of which is the weak vanilla captain options.

Then would you mind maybe explaining the positive and negative points for you of the Blood Angels, Wolves, Templars, and Vanilla Marines so that we can help you better?

[Serath]

Wolfs are great in cc and can use long fangs also with great affect in support fire, and they can cheat by adding an objective wharever they want :) but mainly you go SW if you have a love for special characters and things like wolf lords can be powerd up so much that their eyebrows are 40 points each but act as powerfists

 

Templar are very solid i find, easily underestamated preoperly but are very good in cc if you have prefered enomy with everyone, however you dont get much flexiblity with the HQ choices as one of them has to be the EC but it is a nice little hq for his points

 

BA are definatly the hardest of all to play well, they have very nice bubbles and amazing movement, however if you make a mistake with dc placement or let someone charge your assault unit, or put a priest right at the front and a i6 eldar pansy rips him to pieces :P but in terms of characters our base HQs are very nice and the honer guard makes them very good too, the captain maybe underpowerd hpwever i found with an honer guard well kitted to about 300 points for the lot it will eat through a terminator squad quite hapily, oh and our special characters are great too, mefeston is evil but if you make 1 mistake he will be blown to pieces by all your opponets AP2 guns, dante is very nice, aswell as astoroth but they cost the earth.

 

in my honest opinion you want SW, they have the best chars who can give good bonuses to their squads and their stock wolf lord can become insane and that what it sounds like you want, sounds a bit like you have made the captain what you want to be on the battlefirld, and who hasnt done that, hope this dull monologue helps hehe :)

[Khavos]

Then would you mind maybe explaining the positive and negative points for you of the Blood Angels, Wolves, Templars, and Vanilla Marines so that we can help you better?

 

Certainly.

 

Blood Angels positives are that a jump pack assault-oriented list seems not only possible, but actually potentially effective. They seem like they can play fast and killy without resorting to a mech flood. Even if Razorspam is optimal for WAAC effectiveness, it's not the only way to build them. Successor chapters are possible, thus DIYs are possible. Negatives are their limited HQ options and their fluff, as well as the prevalence of chaplains. I could actually see myself breaking my no-SCs rule and using Tycho or Seth, just because nobody else seems to use them - a large part of my aversion to "Counts As" is the eyeroll-worthy "So did your Mephiston or my Mephiston die in that combat?" situations - but neither of them are jump packers. Grr.

 

Space Wolves positives are their incredible HQ options, their both shooty and choppy troops, and their ability to build competitive lists that don't rely on mech heavier than Rhino chassis. Their fluff is both positive and negative. It's positive as I like the background of the chapter, but a negative in that it eliminates the possibility of successor chapters, and you have to do a bit of fluff gymnastics to get a workable Lost Company. Their negatives are that they are, in essence, a shooty army, and it's difficult to build an effective assault-focused force with them. Also, their best assault unit is a unit that I find ridiculous, while their jump packers are arguably worse than vanilla Assault Marines.

 

Black Templars can be decently effective as an assault-tuned army. Unfortunately, neither their codex nor their fluff lends itself well to a DIY, and a couple of guys in the small group I normally play with already run BT.

 

Vanilla positives are their non-special HQs, I guess. Better than BA, worse than SW in terms of customization. Their flexibility is obviously a big positive for most people, but I generally don't run SCs and I'm not wild about bike lists, so most of that flexibility isn't applicable for me. Negatives are that they're a shooting army, and a vanilla "assault list" boils down to just having a squad of TH/SS Terminators in a LR, unless you run a one-trick pony Shrike list.

 

Honestly, I appreciate the attempts to sift through my various gameplay-based and fluff-based preferences. It's a tough and often contradictory task. I've been trying it myself for quite a while.

[Khavos]

in my honest opinion you want SW, they have the best chars who can give good bonuses to their squads and their stock wolf lord can become insane and that what it sounds like you want, sounds a bit like you have made the captain what you want to be on the battlefirld, and who hasnt done that, hope this dull monologue helps hehe :)

 

Ha! If I made the Captain what I'd want to be on the field, then he'd be the Librarian, who can shoot lightning with his mind. :)

[jeremy1391]

You can do what I did and just play both!

 

Edit, please no chat speak!

[Serath]

im no asking for someone to shoot lightnign from their mine.....i want meffy with a 3+ invun :)

[Joasht]

You can do what I did and just play both!

I did this too :X

[Grey Mage]

BA captains suck to much, but SWs arent assaulty enough?

 

Perhaps you should post up your chapter fluff and get some advice from there... cause right now it seems like you just wont be happy with anything.

 

Though I will echo someones sentiment of looking at the BT- they might be just what your looking for.

[Joasht]

What the OP needs is the second 3rd edition Chaos codex, you know, the one where you could pile on a bazillion points onto your Chaos Lord.

[Khavos]

BA captains suck to much, but SWs arent assaulty enough?

 

Perhaps you should post up your chapter fluff and get some advice from there... cause right now it seems like you just wont be happy with anything.

 

Though I will echo someones sentiment of looking at the BT- they might be just what your looking for.

 

Non-SC vanilla BA captains are universally agreed to not be any good, yes. I've not been fond of using SCs since literally everyone around here ran their vanilla lists with Vulkan. Having two Vulkan lists fighting each other, moving on to fight two OTHER Vulkan lists afterwards in their tournament bracket...yeah. However, they can be a JP army, and I really like that. One-dimensional or not, that one dimension is assault. Their fluff's terrible, but you can easily make a successor chapter, and that's a big plus.

 

Space Wolves' best assault unit is one that I despise, and their Skyclaws are terrible - so no jump packs. Chapter fluff's irrelevant in the case of Space Wolves, as they have no successors, and it doesn't make a lot of sense for anyone else to be using a codex where every other word is 'wolf'. They play best as a shooty army.

[bulley]

I find it amusing that this is a carbon copy of the thread you denote as the "other" convince me to play BA thread.

 

Honestly why waste these guys time askin when you know the answer already

 

YOU want to play a capt, BAs cant run one. You knew that so why ask if that's the starting an stopping point of an army for you.

 

We can't rewrite the codex for you so you'll have to go with the other CC army. But honestly I think your like all the others that ask, you want us to stroke you hair and tell you its alright that you go play the easier codex in the wolves, an give you that affirmation your not just taking the easy choice when you "really want to try Angels".

 

Your a space wolves player waiting o happen 100%. There's no shame in it, but it's pointless trying to get people to convince you otherwise.

[Zealadin]

I'd almost suggest another race too, but the problem you face is that realistically very few armies are pure CC monsters.

Nids and Orks are probably the most so, as they rely upon numbers to a large extent to ensure they get into combat despite whatever the other person is using. Personally I find the horde concept to be totally contrary to my playstyle which limits me, you might be different however.

Eldar one could argue are quite CC-ish, but this edition they simply lack the ability to use a list that really takes advantage of this unless your looking at a jetseer council list.

 

Heavy terminator lists are somewhat viable, but if you dislike the models maybe buy the Grey Knight Terminator models and use those? They are amazing models imo! Metal makes them hard to convert but its doable. You also gain FNP/FC if you make your list right, as well as other BA goodies!

Lots of options here, and a Captain in termi armour might be a reasonable choice.

 

I'd also suggest you seriously consider a Sanguinary Guard list, take a look at what you can do with them. A captain with a SS would add a bit of toughness to the unit, and they are a very CC orientated unit, they require ALOT of skill to play but thats part of the challenge! You do however need Dante to make this work, so its alot of points into HQ's.

[Fenric]

Yeh Dante's pretty cool but woudl never take him just for the fact that I don't like messing with opponents stats. I feel that is crossing the line of what a character shoudl be able to do in this game. But there are so many other options for Blood Angels I don't mind anyways.

 

Wolf Lords can be made pretty strong but they are also expensive. You need to kit them on a Thunderwolf to make them really stand out. Otherwise Wolf Priests and Rune priests just give you more tactical and buffing options.

[Morticon]

I have to echo what GM said a few posts up - everything that is being suggested is just being beaten down.

 

Your comparisons are, quite frankly, misguided.

 

You're hammering your square self into a triangle shaped hole and then wondering out loud why the edges are so tight.

 

You have your information already.

You know what BA captains can do.

You know you dont want to play other HQ choices, nor use counts as.

Yet, you're upset about the facts above.

 

That's not what BA are about.

You're asking us to convince you why you should play BA - which is fair- but within the confines of your specifications.

 

Its like saying-

 

"Hey guys choose any colour in the rainbow that you like....except red.

 

Oh...and blue and green..cause i dont like those...cause they look better as a paint.

 

Yellow too for that matter".

 

 

It really makes no sense.

 

 

BA doesnt sound like the army for you simply because your own preference in fluff and game style choices are not where our strengths as an army lie or where your interests lie.

 

You either need to chill out and lay off the self-restriction or search elsewhere.

 

Alternatively

Rather rock the wolves in a more creative counts as way or find out how to make the templars work for you.

[Ranwulf]

I have to echo what GM said a few posts up - everything that is being suggested is just being beaten down.

 

Your comparisons are, quite frankly, misguided.

 

You're hammering your square self into a triangle shaped hole and then wondering out loud why the edges are so tight.

 

You have your information already.

You know what BA captains can do.

You know you dont want to play other HQ choices, nor use counts as.

Yet, you're upset about the facts above.

 

That's not what BA are about.

You're asking us to convince you why you should play BA - which is fair- but within the confines of your specifications.

 

Its like saying-

 

"Hey guys choose any colour in the rainbow that you like....except red.

 

Oh...and blue and green..cause i dont like those...cause they look better as a paint.

 

Yellow too for that matter".

 

 

It really makes no sense.

 

 

BA doesnt sound like the army for you simply because your own preference in fluff and game style choices are not where our strengths as an army lie or where your interests lie.

 

You either need to chill out and lay off the self-restriction or search elsewhere.

 

Alternatively

Rather rock the wolves in a more creative counts as way or find out how to make the templars work for you.

 

I think this is the third time I read someone saying stuff like that.

 

With all due respect OP, but we have limited choices of armies, being so restricted you will find a difficult time of choosing any army to play.

 

I play both, and I have seen their differences, I like an strong assault army, which I can do with my BA and I like a not as strong CC army, but a heck anyway and powerful shooting, like the Space Wolves.

 

If the Captain is a MUST, then don't play Blood Angels. Seriously. Don't like SC? Ok, that's fair, but you will only have Reclusiarchs and Librarians as non-SC HQs...

 

Ran

[Khavos]

Yet, you're upset about the facts above.

 

Hardly crying my eyes out, I promise.

 

You're asking us to convince you why you should play BA - which is fair- but within the confines of your specifications.

 

Its like saying-

 

"Hey guys choose any colour in the rainbow that you like....except red.

 

Oh...and blue and green..cause i dont like those...cause they look better as a paint.

 

Yellow too for that matter".

 

 

It really makes no sense.

 

Not at all. In my job, clients define specifications for what they need or want all the time. If we can figure out a way to make it work, we do. If we know we can't, we simply tell them that. "BA won't work for you," is a perfectly valid answer, but they're my overpriced plastic toy soldiers, and if I prefer to use them a certain way, I think I'm perfectly within my rights to insist on it. :)

 

BA doesnt sound like the army for you simply because your own preference in fluff and game style choices are not where our strengths as an army lie or where your interests lie.

 

That's fair. If BA lists are completely crippled by having one out of two HQ choices being suboptimal, then you're absolutely right.

[Grey Mage]

That's fair. If BA lists are completely crippled by having one out of two HQ choices being suboptimal, then you're absolutely right.

And why is it sub-optimal?

 

Seriously. Because a couple of guys on the interwebz have decreed it? Because 'general opinion' says so? *shakes head* whatever. General thought leads to stupidity, redundancy, and stagnation, innovation leads to domination.

 

A Librarian will not always be the optimal choice for a BA army, nor a Head Chaplain... sometimes, the Captain is the one you need. He is dead killy, and hes flexable in his equipment load out- and in this game you pay for that flexability. Like Wolf-gaurd.

 

I dont know what you do for work, but its rather likely you have far more options for your clients then what 40k has for you. This restaurant has only 16 items on the menu. Any Wargame currently in print is going to be the same way too.... they simply dont hand you infinite possibilities, its to much for them to cover.

 

But I think the biggest thing here is you say your wanting this or that because of the fluff- so why not just take it? If you truely are, as you say, a fluff centered player then what is the big deal? Having a few units in your list that arent easily predicted can give you a tactical advantage and if they truely are sub-optimal itll make you a better player as you overcome it. If you really are interested only in the most dead-killy units in the game then your not asking us if itll fit your fluff at all- just wether or not you can twink a particular codex the way you want it to be.

 

So indeed, if you want help with getting something to match your fluff- then post up your fluff! If your not really after a fluffy list then stop claiming it as a reason to not take uber-unit #3.

[Ranwulf]

BA doesnt sound like the army for you simply because your own preference in fluff and game style choices are not where our strengths as an army lie or where your interests lie.

 

That's fair. If BA lists are completely crippled by having one out of two HQ choices being suboptimal, then you're absolutely right.

 

No. Blood Angels are not crippled in anyway by having two HQ choices being the most "cost effective", fluff aside, the Reclusiarch is a Captain but with a reroll power, and even worse a reroll to hit and wound when together with DC. Why would we use a Captain? Because we want. They are not bad in anyway, but we rather choose other HQs that can do stuff better than him.

 

Reclusiarchs with Death Company are probably one of the killest of all units in the game.

 

Librarians are INCREDIBLY efficient with Shield of Sanguinius (5++ Save in the opponent Shooting fase), Wings, Unleash Rage.

 

They are Assault oriented HQs with the objective of being force multipliers. Captains can be used, but synergy wise, I rather get an Unleash Rage Librarian with Terminators(if you like this kind of things), or a Death Company with Reclusiarch.

 

Ran

[Arkio]

+1 for ran, i would agree with that. OP you need to either get the idea that the only way you want to run your force is with a captain or suck it up play a counts as Cmndr D and "forget" to use dante's statline modifier ability. or try a game or two with a chaplain. aside from the references towards vampirisim what is so terrible about the blood angels fluff? our sanguinary priests and Chaplains are, and have always been the equivalent in the chapter hierarchy as a captain. this is because of the nature of the flaw that even chaptermasters can succemb to the thirst and the rage and when that occurs the chapter needs strong leadership while a new chapter master is decided upon. chaplians in a blood angels army are in essence a secondary captain/chapter master in the event that one in the leadership position joins the death company.