5th edition BA vs SW

[amrogers3]

New to 5th edition and got a question. How do the wolves compare to the BA when it comes to close combat? I understand BA are very strong in the new edition and I was trying to sort out which army is stronger when it comes to the good ole fashion beatdown.

 

At least in 4th wolves were able to get a power weapon in each squad but the BA get all those crazy rules (I'm not too familar with them) for engaging in close combat + they have the death company which used to be pretty mean (not sure if they are still mean in 5th).

[Quillen]

Blood Angles is sorta a kids army in that fact it is really forgiving. If youhve priests nearby and everything, you just need to bump into melee in a couple of places and you probly won.

 

SpaceWolves have to make sure they use s ton of tactics and soften up the bad guys.

 

I beat Blood Angles all the time, but I have to shoot hell out of them and watch for thier Demon Prince. That's it.

 

I feel Space Wolves have way better fluff and are more well rounded. Blood Angles are always just charge in and get the charge for an easy win. That is basicly the difference.

[Khavos]

Blood Angles is sorta a kids army in that fact it is really forgiving. If youhve priests nearby and everything, you just need to bump into melee in a couple of places and you probly won.

 

SpaceWolves have to make sure they use s ton of tactics and soften up the bad guys.

 

You got that exactly backwards, oddly enough.

 

Anyway, OP, Blood Angels are better at CC than Space Wolves. The Wolves have what is arguably the best CC unit in the game in the form of TWC - not the killiest, but the best - while the Blood Angels unquestionably have the best CC Power Armor army. S5 I5 FNP Assault Marines are nothing to scoff at. Nor is an HQ unit that can beat even the most kitted-out Thunderlord to death with his own mount.

[amrogers3]

S5 I5 FNP Assault Marines is nothing to scoff at.

 

Which part of that quote that you referred to is backwards?

[Khavos]

Which part of that quote that you referred to is backwards?

 

The bit about BA being easy to play and SW requiring finesse.

[ORKILL]

Blood Angles is sorta a kids army in that fact it is really forgiving. If youhve priests nearby and everything, you just need to bump into melee in a couple of places and you probly won.

 

SpaceWolves have to make sure they use s ton of tactics and soften up the bad guys.

 

You got that exactly backwards, oddly enough.

 

Anyway, OP, Blood Angels are better at CC than Space Wolves. The Wolves have what is arguably the best CC unit in the game in the form of TWC - not the killiest, but the best - while the Blood Angels unquestionably have the best CC Power Armor army. S5 I5 FNP Assault Marines are nothing to scoff at. Nor is an HQ unit that can beat even the most kitted-out Thunderlord to death with his own mount.

 

 

That depends on who gets the charge. I have mowed through 10 BA assault troops with 5 WG with PWs/PFs. FNP didn't help them, Mephiston didn't help them, and even their succubus mamas didn't help them.

[Marshal Wilhelm]

Blood Angles is sorta a kids army in that fact it is really forgiving. If youhve priests nearby and everything, you just need to bump into melee in a couple of places and you probly won.

 

SpaceWolves have to make sure they use s ton of tactics and soften up the bad guys.

 

I beat Blood Angles all the time, but I have to shoot hell out of them and watch for thier Demon Prince. That's it.

 

I feel Space Wolves have way better fluff and are more well rounded. Blood Angles are always just charge in and get the charge for an easy win. That is basicly the difference.

 

I am with Khavos 100% and not just because he teased WLK ;)

 

Blood Angels are the Marine Eldar. Hard to use well, amazing when done right. People do use them as a rush army, but that isn't the best way, imo.

 

Space Wolves are actually like Marines in the fluff, good at everything. Ironically the Ultramarines, 'champions' of being balanced, are the Marine Tau. Shoot, move away, shoot, combat tactics out of assaults, shoot.

 

Wolves are the jack-of-all-trades and master of none. The thing they do the best is actually beasts and cavalry.

 

Facing Templars, World Eaters, Nids or Orks? ~ dakka dakka dakka, pop Wolf Standard and nullify their advantage for an assault. By that time you are facing less of them and roll them.

 

Facing Tau, Guard or Ultras ~ Rush! Their weaker warriors get out classed by your normal guys.

 

Other things that make Wolves reasonably easy to use:

Grey Hunters, should cost more than Tacs.

Long Fangs, cheap like Bloods Devs, but can split fire. Not having to over-kill something is powerful and why MSU trumps Few Small Units, generally.

Rune priests, LL is a good all rounder spell and Jaws is excellent at taking out things that should be a problem.

TWC, Nob bikers for Marines?! Oh yeah baby!

 

I'm not trying to bash you, and like Wolves muchly, but I disagree that Wolves are not an easier army to use.

[Khavos]

That depends on who gets the charge. I have mowed through 10 BA assault troops with 5 WG with PWs/PFs. FNP didn't help them, Mephiston didn't help them, and even their succubus mamas didn't help them.

 

Which I think reinforces my point about Wolves being easier to use pretty solidly.

[Wysten]

Aye, BA have the advantage of speed and being really good on the charge and potencial to be tough, thing is though they really do pay for it. You can't afford to throw all sorts of stuff together and expect it to do a all round good job, with BA you have to be on the ball and know what you want to do for each guy you have on the field. Quite unlike space wolves who have the flexability to react to situations with plenty of leeway.

 

 

BA do have several advantages, being able to mass jumppack a entire army with feel no pain is king, Vanguard really come into their own with desent of angels to get them and their comrades on target quickly. Thing is, you have to make everything structured to do something. Vanguard, while they can definately fight, are mainly there to tie up nearby units so they can't assualt. Assualt Squads add numbers and are used mainly to get meltaguns on target, while the Sanguard or Honour Guard is the expensive hammer that wins close combat. and swings the balience of close combat. Or Blood Rodio, which is using bikes in a similar manner to the vanguard to set up good assualts by the San/Honour Guard.

 

Without this rigid structure, they are all too expensive to make many mistakes with, every lost unit is a massive blow so they need to be efficent and hit hard and have every unit do what they do best, reguardless of the situation. Does this make them predictable? Perhaps, but much like a hammer, being able to see it does not nessiarily mean the ability to dodge it. The real ability is building the list to take full advantage of each BA unit under your command, very much unlike space wolves who don't cost the earth and can be fairly flexable in how they react, they can recieve the charge as well as they can deal it. The two armies could not be anymore different, except for the fact they are space marines and they use largely simlar equipment with different perks.

 

BA can win combat on the charge, the problem is getting them there and making sure that they do what they can do. But when they do, what a sight it is.

[arcticcanadian]

I'm with Wysten and having played both armies as well as playing against them. BA must be used for the exact purpose that they were built for on paper, if not. They suffer and will be put down realitively easily by your opponent. But again if BA get the charge with a priest nearby and the assault is coordinated. The result is terrifyingly effective. SW need to be handled with a controlled hand just as BA or for that matter any other army in the 40K universe. Having a combination of GH, WG, and a unique character and using each to its own advantage you can be absolutely devastating. In my opinion it goes both ways, no army wins by just one tactic alone. Yet there are those who will build lists that depend almost solely on one tactic and against certain army lists does very well while aainst others that same list has no value.

 

It is hard to say one is better than other because each is very unique and does not play as the other and in most cases the same tactics do not work for both armies. Questions such as these are very opinion based and in the end, its your call to think which in your view is better.

[Wolf Guard Dan]

I understand that a lot of the BA players here have a good argument in their reasoning of BA being harder to play than SW. Never having played BA myself, I can only speculate.

 

But my experiences playing SW is that it can be as challenging as any army. Don't forget the saying, Jack of All Trades, Master of None. It is really true. We are flexible, but having to deal with enemies that are assaulty or shooty we have to adjust our strategy in-game more so than assaulty or shooty armies. That is challenging about playing a middle of the pack army. We have to be as cunning or even more cunning than many other armies. We have to use synergy effectively and pick our matchups well. To me it is more rewarding of a play-style than just saying "Hey you Beserkers charge and kill, then charge some more, til you are dead or there is nothing else to kill." Or holding a gunline until you are charged by the beserkers.

 

Wolves shoot and assault equally as well, so you have to make challenging decisions and adjust to what is coming at you. Recently, I played against my buddy's orks. He was in combat first turn with most of his army. By the end of turn 3 he forfeit. I lost maybe 5 models the whole game. A dreadnought and Lone Wolf to a unit of kitted Nobs. A ML longfang, and 2 grey hunters. Being able to set up a strategy and adjust in-game is what won me the match. And my Rune Priest killed two warbosses. :D Force weapon FTW.

 

Getting back to the point. Wolves require a tremendous amount of strategy to play. They don't go into a fight thinking, I am going to hold a gunline or charge straight in. Either of those options isn't as open to us like it is for other armies. We have to use cunning to adapt. Our ease of adapting may make us a more forgiving army to play but to master it is difficult.

[Ranwulf]

This fella have a nice things hat sum up what I think is true:

 

 

Sorry to harp on everybody's parade here, but it bothers me that people can so readily dismiss Codex: Space Wolves as an "easy win" book, that people complain about all the stuff lacking in Codex: Space Marines, or who naturally assume that Codex: Blood Angels will have their time. These are the same people who posturize that Space Wolves are only so naturally powerful because people have had more time to figure it out, and that given an extended progression of time, Blood Angels will rise up and replace them as the dominant codex. By that logic, Codex: Blood Angels will become the new "easy win" Codex once people have "figured it out".

 

Please, get off your high horse.

 

The bottom problem is this, and this will happen with EVERY codex, past, present, and future: people are unhappy, angry, bitter, worked up, because they are comparing Codices to Codices.

 

"Why doesn't my Codex have this?"

"Why do they get these shiny toys and we don't?"

"I want Feel No Pain and Furious Charge for my infantry."

"Mephiston is a crutch for players"

"Thunderlord/Thunderwolf lists are beardy and broken."

 

The list goes on, and the problem is people fail to realize that you cannot compare Codices to each other because you end up with a faulty standard, particularly when you become so narrow-minded as to focus in on and compare units to units! You end up setting a poorly conceived standard based on one or two particular Codices and by comparing everything to that standard, things become unbalanced, illogical, and just plain silly!

 

The fact is, Codex: Space Marines, Codex: Blood Angels, and Codex: Space Wolves are all equally balanced books. What you fail to realize (and why you perceive some books as stronger or weaker, as "easy win" or whatever) is that each book is designed for a particular play style. This play style is simple in nature, and it defines the Codex, it's units, options, and how the army plays in any variation in any combination on the tabletop.

 

Codex: Space Marines was designed for versatility and/or flexability. However you want to put it, Codex Space Marines gives you many different ways to play the army, from pure infantry to pure mech to biker lists, using different characters to radically change the functionality of some units. And in all instances in the macro situation, most of their units keep this versatility in mind. Tactical squads able to field combat weapons, special weapons, and heavy weapons for a variety of situations, or Devastators with a mix of heavy weapons and generic troopers. You could take Pedro Kantor to bring in Sternguard with their special ammunition to give yourself more powerful close-range firepower, or field a Captain on bike or Kor'sarro on Moondrakken to field an army entirely mounted on bikes. Vulkan allows you to twin-link flamers and meltas, and master-craft all thunder hammers, naturally creating in the army a leaning towards those particular weapons, and units that field those weapons (Land Speeders and Assault Terminators, as an example). All these and more are just ways in which Codex: Space Marines achieves a versatility that Blood Angels or Space Wolves could never hope to achieve.

 

Codex: Space Wolves was designed for efficiency. No matter how you try to argue it, that is their key tenet. You can try to argue that Space Wolf units are versatile or flexible (ie Grey Hunters being good at shooting and assault, etc.), and you would be wrong. On an individual level Space Wolf units are incredibly inflexible, because their units are stream-lined and geared for one particular purpose, a purpose they will excel at. But that is their greatest strength, because each unit serves a purpose. It fulfills one function, it excels at it, it exists for that purpose alone, and it is in this narrow path that the Space Wolf army as a whole becomes versatile, flexible. Each unit is efficient because you pay marginally fewer points on units to fulfill whatever function they exist for, and you aren't wasting points on anything else. You don't struggle with wasting points on un-used gear, you don't struggle with thinking...do I want this unit to stand still and fire its heavy weapon, or move up and use its special weapon or engage in combat? You don't have to worry if you want your character around to buff your army, or get him up into combat where he truly excels. Space Wolf units are efficient to the extreme, and when you incorporate a harmonious balance of units in your army, when you capitalize on the synergy to be found combining ranged units with close range units, you have an army that is capable of doing whatever you ask of it.

 

Codex: Blood Angels was designed for aggressiveness. Regardless of the units you choose, the Codex invariably leans heavily towards an in-your face style of play, one that favors the bold and punishes the players with the lack of foresight to properly plan and coordinate their attacks. Units in the Blood Angels codex are devastatingly powerful, exponentially more so when used synergistically, but this is counter-balanced by how expensive they are. By creating that disparity, you are given a choice of investing in a lot of heavy hitters and shiny toys, but being much more fragile, or investing in a stable core, but giving up a lot of the more fun elements. But in all circumstances, to really capitalize on the strengths of your army you need to be aggressive with it. Isolate enemy units, destroy them with the full force of your army, and move on. You take the initiative and force your opponent on the defensive. Force them always to react to you, whether you use your fast vehicles to create a super-mobile, shooty army, or use your combat units to create an army that sweeps everything away in combat. THAT is how Blood Angels win, and it will punish those without that killer drive.

 

And no matter which book they use, good players who understand their army, who understand their enemy, and know how to use their strengths to exploit their enemy's weaknesses - these are the players who win. It's not up to the book, it's up to the player.

 

 

DV8

 

Ran

[the jeske]

Either of those options isn't as open to us like it is for other armies.

o_0 what ? the thing about SW is that they do both above avarge shoting and assault in the same list . If a BA or normal sm dude does a razor build then it is just a gunline that moves a bit, hvy anti tank or mass assault and it cant deal with opposing armies. SW can counter both at the same time and have above avarge support units. SW players will say that that their aint ideal , that they WGs break up squads composition and take up elite slots and that long fangs dont have ablative wounds. But those problems are nothing compering to the fact that SP are IC and just die in hth or the fact that in an age of mecha 15pts more per transport/tank means 1 less squad or support unit at 1500 or more . they also dont have support units like SW, yes they have the MM attack bikes cool and mefo [which stops working so good when someone has rune staffs or hoods , not to mention the horror of runes] or cheap gear the breaks up whole builds [like choser of slain killing infiltration builds] . BAs all armies played at highest tier of gaming requier skill to play , but at mid tier BAs are very unforgiving while SW with their 3xLF 3xGH 1xRP build have a list that plays by its own.

[Marshal Wilhelm]

Either of those options isn't as open to us like it is for other armies.

o_0 what ? the thing about SW is that they do both above avarge shoting and assault in the same list . If a BA or normal sm dude does a razor build then it is just a gunline that moves a bit, hvy anti tank or mass assault and it cant deal with opposing armies. SW can counter both at the same time and have above avarge support units. SW players will say that that their aint ideal , that they WGs break up squads composition and take up elite slots and that long fangs dont have ablative wounds. But those problems are nothing compering to the fact that SP are IC and just die in hth or the fact that in an age of mecha 15pts more per transport/tank means 1 less squad or support unit at 1500 or more . they also dont have support units like SW, yes they have the MM attack bikes cool and mefo [which stops working so good when someone has rune staffs or hoods , not to mention the horror of runes] or cheap gear the breaks up whole builds [like choser of slain killing infiltration builds] . BAs all armies played at highest tier of gaming requier skill to play , but at mid tier BAs are very unforgiving while SW with their 3xLF 3xGH 1xRP build have a list that plays by its own.

 

Exactly.

If some Wolves players don't realise this, cool. It doesn't mean what we have said isn't true :)

 

EDIT: and it's not like the Jeske or I are BA players claiming we were ripped off. We are neutral and can see objectively whose is easier to play.

[Skalver]

Either of those options isn't as open to us like it is for other armies.

o_0 what ? the thing about SW is that they do both above avarge shoting and assault in the same list . If a BA or normal sm dude does a razor build then it is just a gunline that moves a bit, hvy anti tank or mass assault and it cant deal with opposing armies. SW can counter both at the same time and have above avarge support units. SW players will say that that their aint ideal , that they WGs break up squads composition and take up elite slots and that long fangs dont have ablative wounds. But those problems are nothing compering to the fact that SP are IC and just die in hth or the fact that in an age of mecha 15pts more per transport/tank means 1 less squad or support unit at 1500 or more . they also dont have support units like SW, yes they have the MM attack bikes cool and mefo [which stops working so good when someone has rune staffs or hoods , not to mention the horror of runes] or cheap gear the breaks up whole builds [like choser of slain killing infiltration builds] . BAs all armies played at highest tier of gaming requier skill to play , but at mid tier BAs are very unforgiving while SW with their 3xLF 3xGH 1xRP build have a list that plays by its own.

 

Your typical BA (Rhino / Razorback) + Predator spam army is, to all intents and purposes the same as a GH (Rhino / Razorback) + LF army.

 

Compare Razorback squads, 6 GH in a razorback is 125 points, 6 BA assault marines in a razorback is 136 points. The GH get counterattack, the BA get a fast transport and a Ld 9 / A 2 sergeant. Trying to argue that the GH squad is somehow ezmode and the BA squad requires skill is nonsensical. Similarly a 135 point Autocannon / Lascannon Predator vs a 140 point 6 man missile launcher Long Fangs pack, you get one less shot but your support is on a fast AV 13 tank as opposed to a very static infantry squad.

 

Both armies have builds that are more complicated but your assertion that BAs have no easy builds is just plain nonsensical.

 

I don't think there is anything much to seperate the two armies with regards strength, both have several very competitive builds. Both are certainly stronger than regular SM armies and I would say both are easier to play, not by virtue of SM being particularly complex but it is just easier to win with a stronger codex. There is nothing more to it than that.

[Wispy]

Not that I disagree - BA finesse, Wolves flexible , but in the match up of BA vs SW, I would argue that the key to beating the BA is to apply a little finesse yourself. If you're kitted for CC, and they're kitted for CC, and you attack them head on, you're just asking for a coin toss victory. Not attacking them head on is key - sit back and let them come to you, while hamper their mobility from range, and maneuver for the best possible counter attack.

 

The bit of fluff Phil Kelly wrote on Grey Hunter attack tactics is pretty accurate, actually.

[Khavos]

I understand that a lot of the BA players here have a good argument in their reasoning of BA being harder to play than SW. Never having played BA myself, I can only speculate.

 

I think you ought to build a BA list sometime. Not play it, of course, but simply try building one.

 

But my experiences playing SW is that it can be as challenging as any army. Don't forget the saying, Jack of All Trades, Master of None. It is really true. We are flexible, but having to deal with enemies that are assaulty or shooty we have to adjust our strategy in-game more so than assaulty or shooty armies. That is challenging about playing a middle of the pack army. We have to be as cunning or even more cunning than many other armies. We have to use synergy effectively and pick our matchups well. To me it is more rewarding of a play-style than just saying "Hey you Beserkers charge and kill, then charge some more, til you are dead or there is nothing else to kill." Or holding a gunline until you are charged by the beserkers.

 

Er, what? Seriously, Space Wolves are nowhere near a middle of the pack army. They're currently the strongest codex in the game.

 

Wolves shoot and assault equally as well, so you have to make challenging decisions and adjust to what is coming at you.

 

Nah. Shoot the assaulty stuff. Assault the shooty stuff. That's pretty basic. Wolves simply do it better than everybody else.

[Wolf Guard Dan]

I understand that a lot of the BA players here have a good argument in their reasoning of BA being harder to play than SW. Never having played BA myself, I can only speculate.

 

I think you ought to build a BA list sometime. Not play it, of course, but simply try building one.

 

 

Er, what? Seriously, Space Wolves are nowhere near a middle of the pack army. They're currently the strongest codex in the game.

 

Nah. Shoot the assaulty stuff. Assault the shooty stuff. That's pretty basic. Wolves simply do it better than everybody else.

 

I really don't care to build a BA list. I was just giving my experience playing wolves. I was not comparing them to BA directly, but to other army styles in general. So I may have been off topic by not comparing the two. I just wished to partake in the discussion and bring points through my experience of just being a Wolves player.

 

I don't think I used the correct language in "Middle of the pack." What I meant by that was their playstyle is neither dedicated to assault or shooting but incorporates both styles and is comfortable with both while not master of either. And thanks, we are the strongest in the game :D *wolf howl*

 

@ last part- As a general strategy that's okay. But there is more to it than that. It's choosing your battles. There are times to charge a squad of 30 ork boys with your GH and times to shoot Tau Fire Warriors. Having that ability makes for a more challenging and rewarding, because it opens up different tactics for us to choose from.

 

I will try and get a game against blood angels, but i do not think anyone at my LGS plays them. As for SW vs BA in 5th edition. BA are assault masters, SW are something else. Each has their own way of being played. That's all I will say on that.

[Wysten]

I think the point was to show you how much harder it is to build a good BA list, compared to building a space wolves list. Just try it, since everything costs a bit more, it really does stack up over time.

[Khavos]

I really don't care to build a BA list. I was just giving my experience playing wolves. I was not comparing them to BA directly, but to other army styles in general. So I may have been off topic by not comparing the two. I just wished to partake in the discussion and bring points through my experience of just being a Wolves player.

 

I don't think I used the correct language in "Middle of the pack." What I meant by that was their playstyle is neither dedicated to assault or shooting but incorporates both styles and is comfortable with both while not master of either. And thanks, we are the strongest in the game ^_^ *wolf howl*

 

@ last part- As a general strategy that's okay. But there is more to it than that. It's choosing your battles. There are times to charge a squad of 30 ork boys with your GH and times to shoot Tau Fire Warriors. Having that ability makes for a more challenging and rewarding, because it opens up different tactics for us to choose from.

 

I will try and get a game against blood angels, but i do not think anyone at my LGS plays them. As for SW vs BA in 5th edition. BA are assault masters, SW are something else. Each has their own way of being played. That's all I will say on that.

 

The problem is that having different tactics available to you in the same list isn't a challenge, it's a considerable bonus. BA lists don't really have that. BA assault lists have to charge that squad of 30 ork boys because their shooting is pathetic and limited to one, maybe two specialist anti-armor squads; BA Razorspam lists have to shoot it because they have no assault punch. BA lists are expensive. You can't go generalist with them.

 

And the real kicker is that BA assault power is deceptively fragile. FNP FC Assault Marines are pretty good, yeah, but they also become bog standard Assault Marines the second their easy-to-kill IC gets whacked in CC. Even without that happening, a full squad of Grey Hunters with relevant CC upgrades will come very, very close to holding their own in close combat against BA Assault Marines - while being charged. If they got the charge? They win. Mark of the Wulfen, an extra power weapon, and the Wolf Standard are all insanely good. And we haven't even covered the best assault unit in the game, Thunderwolf Cavalry. The premiere SM assault army's answer to TWC? Run away and hope you can kill it with shooting.

[Valerian]

The problem is that having different tactics available to you in the same list isn't a challenge, it's a considerable bonus. BA lists don't really have that. BA assault lists have to charge that squad of 30 ork boys because their shooting is pathetic and limited to one, maybe two specialist anti-armor squads; BA Razorspam lists have to shoot it because they have no assault punch. BA lists are expensive. You can't go generalist with them.

 

And the real kicker is that BA assault power is deceptively fragile. FNP FC Assault Marines are pretty good, yeah, but they also become bog standard Assault Marines the second their easy-to-kill IC gets whacked in CC. Even without that happening, a full squad of Grey Hunters with relevant CC upgrades will come very, very close to holding their own in close combat against BA Assault Marines - while being charged. If they got the charge? They win. Mark of the Wulfen, an extra power weapon, and the Wolf Standard are all insanely good. And we haven't even covered the best assault unit in the game, Thunderwolf Cavalry. The premiere SM assault army's answer to TWC? Run away and hope you can kill it with shooting.

 

Yeah, concur with Khavos here. Blood Angels can create some really nasty Assault units, but they consist of "Death Star" builds where a player attaches Dante, a Reclusiarch, and a Sanguinary Priest to an Assault Squad (just one example here). A unit like this is hard to face, but is exceptionally fragile to your firepower, and cannot assault out of a Deep Strike - giving you an opportunity to Long Fang it out of existence. Without the extra Independent Characters, a standard Blood Angels Assault Squad isn't really all that impressive, even with the Sanguinary Priest. I've beat them up pretty bad with Grey Hunter and even Wolf Scout packs geared for close combat. If we get the charge (which isn't that hard to do if you just mech up, and wait for the Blood Angels' inevitable approach), we easily come out on top. Also, as Khavos pointed out, Thunderwolf Cavalry are a premier assault unit, and are much more durable than Blood Angels' Jump Infantry.

 

To the OP's question, both armies have excellent close combat capability. Blood Angels are usually highlighted for specializing in close combat, whereas Space Wolves are not so dedicated to the role. However, although Wolves are not dedicated assault specialists, most of our features make it easy for us to compete in this arena. Blood Angels key features are Fast vehicles, Jump Infantry, and Furious Charge. Space Wolves compete with Counter-Attack, Mark of the Wulfen, Wolf Standards, and 2x Special Close Combat Weapons per unit when a Pack Leader is assigned.

[breng77]

I love how anyone is arguing that Sw are not all that powerful or are tough to play. No army is easy to win with unless you are a good player but Sw is one of the easier armies to win with (So is BA, though arguably it is not as easy, as they ahve worse shooting in gerneral and cost more.) Try playing a real middle to back of the pack army and you'll understand finess/difficult to play. Play Dark angels, or Templars, or Grey Knights and then come back and argue that SW or BA are hard to win with.

 

Take a GH pack. If you fully kit it out it can win assaults even if it gets charged. Most normal marines are not able to do this.

[Khavos]

I love how anyone is arguing that Sw are not all that powerful or are tough to play. No army is easy to win with unless you are a good player but Sw is one of the easier armies to win with (So is BA, though arguably it is not as easy, as they ahve worse shooting in gerneral and cost more.) Try playing a real middle to back of the pack army and you'll understand finess/difficult to play. Play Dark angels, or Templars, or Grey Knights and then come back and argue that SW or BA are hard to win with.

 

I agree. I wasn't trying to suggest that Blood Angels are a weak codex - simply a weak codex compared to Space Wolves, which is currently the best codex in the game.

 

Take a GH pack. If you fully kit it out it can win assaults even if it gets charged. Most normal marines are not able to do this.

 

Yep. And that's huge. It gets taken for granted, but it's huge.

[Pavement Artist]

*Goes back to reading my Dark Eldar codex* I'm not fancying the space wolve's chances now :(

 

In all seriousness, i havent seen much to seperate the two armies. Theyve both got the virtue of being the freshest marine codices and they've both got a range of nastiness to bring to the table. Bloodies have the speed element going for them, coupled with the feel no pains up the wazoo means they are a forgiving army. Anyone who argues otherwise is clearly on some sort of hallucinogen. Marine armies as a whole are forgiving, this is why most new starters go for them because they roll up into battle wearing tenament buildings.

 

Space Wolves have a similar reputation for assault nastiness and for sure, the book allows for some sickening lords (the aforementioned thunder wolf bad man). There is an emphasis on a certain degree of versatility with them however. Bloodies by and large are assault geared- Grey hunters on the other hand are a very effective shooting unit who just so happen to be able to take a charge. Theyre more reactionary than most of the blood angels units who will actively go for your throat.

 

And Hell- at the end of the day its always going to come down to which chapter YOU like the look of more. Plus you know, there's always that random chance element that the games built around; the sort of thing that makes guard medics shoot down Eversor assasins.

[Ranwulf]

Blood Angels are HARD.

 

That's the army keyword.

 

HARD to kill.

 

HARD to play.

 

If you play Blood Angels, you know this. They are hard to play. They are unforgiving, if you make a mistake, you can be sure, you WILL pay for it. Sometimes with the entire squad. Some people thinks: "Oh, they have Feel No Pain army wide, so it's easy for them to play." Wrong. Because we have FNP for the reason EVERYTHING IN OUR CODEX is expensive, more than it should be sometimes. Collectively, with each extra points combined, we get a small hard-hitter force. The problem is, sometimes, it's just doens't compensate. So, how do we win? How do we win with an army that is small, but strong?

 

Sinergy.

 

I have a hard time winning with mech BA, exactly because I can't use Mech sinergy right, but Jump pack, Assault sinergy, I KNOW how to win. Each of your units must combine theirs forces, so they can destroy ANYTHING.

 

By all means, HIT THEM HARD, HIT THEM FAST.

 

So, if you wanna win, you HAVE to make sure what you want's dead, IS dead in the turn you make your charge. That, is one of the reasons BA allows you so many Chaplains, Deep Striking, Furious Charge, Death Company, SO MUCH MOBILITY. Because, WE should try as HARD as we can be, to NOT BE DAMAGED. If we are, we can feel how much that hurt. For a 15 points Grey Hunter, losing one is not much of big deal, since in Space Wolves, usually there are other things to do what he did.

 

BA don't. If you lose ONE Assault Marine, your ENTIRE army lose a small, but some what important, part of it's strenght. Does that means, we should stay back and wait for the enemy to attack us? No, it means, USE your head, get cover and strike as fast as you can to beat the hell of the enemy worst guns.

 

 

Blood Angels are for those who, like me, enjoy unstopable EXTREMELY agressive tactical playstyle.

 

Ran