BA aren't competitive

[Deschenus Maximus]

Precisely. I played against a BT player last night that fielded a big scary Termie assault squad (7 termies - 5 claws, 2 hammers) with FC and PE in a Crusader. I was playing a variant of my tourney list (llibby, priests, MSU assault squads w/melta (no power weapons), Assbacks, autolas preds, typhoon speeders). So, at first sight, nothing to compete with that squad. Yet, at the end of the day, it killed a MM attack bike, and then died to a man. I simply outmanoeuvred my opponent (using BA speed), focus-fired the squad to manageable size (using our good firepower) and then counter-charged with all I had (66 S5 I5 attacks hurt!).

 

Moral of the story: we have so many tools in our toolbox that even bad situations are really not that bad when you play right.

[knife&fork]

BA strengths are mobility and close range, either shooting or fighting.

 

I'd like to add durability to that list. Not sure what the point was though. Have I ever said that we shouldn't try to play on the strengths of our codex?

 

A typical IG, SW or GK list is going to be extremely unimpressed by 6 HB razorbacks, might as well just go with rhinos at that point.

 

Everyone has a "preferred" play-style.

 

Why do you think I asked him how he would play it?

 

I have an idea from looking at it, but I think it lacks in certain key areas. Like not enough good anti tank, only 3 guns like that in the entire list.

Sometimes though it doesn't quite work the way you think at first, so that's why I'd like to hear how he would use it.

[Grey Mage]

A typical IG, SW or GK list is going to be extremely unimpressed by 6 HB razorbacks, might as well just go with rhinos at that point.

The only army I can encourage razorback spamming in is C:GK, because they have a hell of a time being stunlocked and their small squads dont suffer as much from not having those extra 5 guys shooting. Id never encourage a C:BA person to do it- despite the fast vehicle bonus- because the squads inside them *assault squads, at 5 man* have serious issues being effective in and of themselves.

 

Everyone has a "preferred" play-style.

 

Why do you think I asked him how he would play it?

 

I have an idea from looking at it, but I think it lacks in certain key areas. Like not enough good anti tank, only 3 guns like that in the entire list.

Sometimes though it doesn't quite work the way you think at first, so that's why I'd like to hear how he would use it.

 

As for your question- wich is perfectly reasonable- its fairly straightforward in thought. The tactical squad and whirlwind provide a firebase, preferably in cover with good LOS of course, and the typhoons stay back at long range, probly out of LOS if I can manage it during deployment. The tactical squad holds home objectives, the WW is there to help deal with hordes of orks, pin IG, etc- Ive had great success with them over the years, and remember that as ordnance its perfectly capable of popping light vehicles like chimera. The Typhoons engage enemy transports, and are split 3 ways to allow for the most control over exactly where your firepower goes.

 

The Assault marines can reserve and deepstrike via DOA or deploy depending on the opponent and what you figure will be on the board. Plasmaguns are actually there as anti-tank as much as anti-tda, as theyre perfectly capable of ripping apart rhinos, raiders, and chimera without issue. Meltaguns are there for heavier targets- and killing paladins- though you can double up on either weapon if you prefer, I like having the option. The Libby deploys with one squad or the other, probly the meltasquad vs GK armies, or with the plasmasquad vs anything with more than one landraider.

 

The Dread drops in and roasts objective camping units like C:SM scouts, infantry platoons, or heavy weapon teams like long fangs etc. Its then equipped to take on tanks or infantry once its on the ground- wich is why I prefer to keep the bloodfists, but you can switch to talons if heavy armor et all isnt big in your meta and Str 6 will do the job nicely. Id seriously consider putting a beacon on that pod if I found that I was DOAing alot.

 

The Vindicator serves as either a distraction for the typhoons, and/or backs up the firebase and then advances towards the assault marine/dread wing of the army to provide close in support vs TDA, monstrous creatures, or large mobs as needed. Its fast, and that may still catch some opponents off gaurd, if not it still doesnt hurt.

 

Adding in VV among others was tempting I admit, but the list doesnt need a hammer unit. At 1500pts it would unbalance the army and hurt us in objective games- all the tools to combined arms down large units like nob bikerz and paladins is in the list. You just have to focus multiple units quickly on one target and then move on- something that BA are quite capable of excelling at vs most opponents. I was also tempted with the shininess of baal predators, but the gauranteed AP 2 on the vindicator, equal range, and potential hits from a large blast swayed it in my favor.

 

And I count 8-10 effective antitank guns in this list. 3 Typhoons, a Libby, a Vindicator, 2 Meltaguns, 2 Plasmaguns, and a Tactical Squad.

[spec.ops]

Personally, I see us having a hard time against all of the "big three" but who cares!

 

The "big three" are all pretty boring to play except maybe GKs Drago Wing...but that will get old soon enough.

 

I used to play Nidzilla back in 4th and it operates the same way. lol

 

Walk up and shoot everything and if they engage you mess them up.

 

But seriously, it got old doing the same thing over and over and over to the point winning was boring.

 

The only thing that hurt me was IG...so even Drago Wings have bad match ups.

 

But, if you actually want to have fun playing a miniatures game with your preferred style check out WM&H's.

 

Its cheaper and a brings a TON of variety...Plus, you really have to think.

 

Not just move shoot charge or just shoot (IG)...or just move and charge (Nids)

[Leksington]

This strikes me as a very silly thread.

 

-Let's pretend BA AREN'T competitive in 5th: So what? A new edition is less than a month away! All of these arguments will be moot in a matter of a few weeks.

-Let's pretend BA ARE competitive in 5th: So what? A new edition is less than a month away! All of these arguments will be moot in a matter of a few weeks.

 

With 5th edition already in my rearview, I find it hard to care about 5th edition balance.

[RagingChainsword]

What's WM&H's?

[Morticon]

Leks -

 

Couldnt we then say your last post here:

 

Removing scoring unit issues...

 

In a vacuum, Mephiston is the most competitive unit.

If you can manage their rage, DC without JPs are second.

 

And since I generally run a DoA list, I don't use either of them. If I went to a transport oriented army, I'd take Meph and a unit of DC every single time.

 

..was useless too?

Why do you care which units are most competitive if 5th ed will change that?

 

We don't just stop caring about everything related to 5th ed. Otherwise this entire board would go dead save for the 6th ed thread.

 

 

This here is a thread that's open because someone made a (very) contentious statement needed unpacking and looking at.

[knife&fork]

stuff

 

About the same way I play my DoA and terminator list. You don't have to engage everything at once (indeed shouldn't) when you can pick apart the enemy bit by bit.

I still think the list could use some improvement though. The list is very dependent on those speeders to work, and I can't see them lasting long with 3 (minimum) psyfleman dreads, some hydras or 15 long fangs on the table. And that's just a few examples. It's not like you are going to outrange any of those once you move in to fire.

 

 

You definitely don't need any VV, imho one of the worst units in the codex unless you are running them in some kind of wacky lists with a ton of locator beacons. Not only do they cost a fortune if you actually want them doing something. They also need risky and unreliable deployment if you want to make full use of their abilities.

 

And I count 8-10 effective antitank guns in this list. 3 Typhoons, a Libby, a Vindicator, 2 Meltaguns, 2 Plasmaguns, and a Tactical Squad.

That's where we have a very different opinion. I would only consider the two meltas and demolisher cannon 'good'. My old 1750 had 7 meltas and there were quite a few times when that felt a bit on the low side.

 

ps

Don't know if you made a typo with the dread, they can't take double flamers.

 

 

Personally, I see us having a hard time against all of the "big three" but who cares!

 

The "big three" are all pretty boring to play except maybe GKs Drago Wing...but that will get old soon enough.

 

If there was no codex GK there would be no problem. Both IG and SW can be dealt with quite well by just using our mobility and get in their face. Try the same thing against GK where you have purifiers or DCAs and you're in for a world of hurt. A strong DoA hybrid that stomps IG and SW will also suffer against some of 'lesser' codexes like CSM, DE and even nids. SW and GK on the other hand doesn't quite have that problem as their strong builds are far less specialized and focus on good scoring, which a lot of tournament missions will reward.

 

I wouldn't consider draigo wing good. While annoying it's a gimmick list with some really bad match ups.

[Leksington]

Leks -

 

Couldnt we then say your last post here:

 

Removing scoring unit issues...

 

In a vacuum, Mephiston is the most competitive unit.

If you can manage their rage, DC without JPs are second.

 

And since I generally run a DoA list, I don't use either of them. If I went to a transport oriented army, I'd take Meph and a unit of DC every single time.

 

..was useless too?

Yes, it was pretty useless.

 

To be honest, I felt bad for the thread starter. I felt like the responses he was getting could be interpreted as "you asked a terrible question" so I thought I'd give him the type of answer I thought he was looking for so he didn't think people were piling on. :D

 

 

I understand where you are coming from regarding 5th edition discussion, but do you feel like anyone on either side of this "BA aren't competitive" discussion are convincing the other side? It isn't like someone asked a question in earnest. It seems like two sides, both of which are firmly entrenched in their positions, are arguing. And I feel it is useful to point out to them that they might not care about this argument in three weeks or so.

[Morticon]

but do you feel like anyone on either side of this "BA aren't competitive" discussion are convincing the other side? It isn't like someone asked a question in earnest. It seems like two sides, both of which are firmly entrenched in their positions, are arguing. And I feel it is useful to point out to them that they might not care about this argument in three weeks or so.

 

 

Thats a valid point to a small degree. And makes a lot more sense now that you've explained it a bit!

 

That being said though, the only issue I still have is that even with the new rules released.....to say a codex (especially BA) is flat out "not competitive" is just incorrect.

 

It's not even presented as an opinion issue because it's been stated as fact.

Even if it was stated as an opinion it would be a wrong opinion based on evidence shown by myself and other posters.

For me it was a language issue and more specifically either poor use of language or poor logical thinking.

 

Its TOTALLY arguable to say "X are better than Y" - whether you can prove it or not is a different story, sure -

But one can argue it and thats totally cool by me. If someone wants to say GK are better than BA, noooo problem. Argue away.

 

BUT to say something like the BA dex is not competitive (full stop!) is just intellectually lacking and anyone that keeps saying this either needs to change the language parameters that they're using* or just be smarter.

 

It's a horrid attempt at online opinion vomit that discredits any player that has competed with the army and succeeded.

 

 

* By language parameters I mean the conditions under which youre using the terminology. eg: stating that by competitive you mean "the ability to consistently beat all lists from other dexs in your particular area" - then all good.

Thats why I enquired from the "OP" if it was a language issue maybe.

 

So in summary:

 

"X is better than Y" = Fair comment and safe to discuss provided sufficient back up.

"X is not competitive" (where X has been shown to win in places) = Logically deficient.

[Drunken Angel]

A grey knight walks into a bar full of blood angels and says you guys suck about sums up the OP's original condescending troll.

 

Its been a useful thread I have learnt a bit, so its far from useless IMO.

[Grey Mage]

stuff

 

About the same way I play my DoA and terminator list. You don't have to engage everything at once (indeed shouldn't) when you can pick apart the enemy bit by bit.

I still think the list could use some improvement though. The list is very dependent on those speeders to work, and I can't see them lasting long with 3 (minimum) psyfleman dreads, some hydras or 15 long fangs on the table. And that's just a few examples. It's not like you are going to outrange any of those once you move in to fire.

 

 

You definitely don't need any VV, imho one of the worst units in the codex unless you are running them in some kind of wacky lists with a ton of locator beacons. Not only do they cost a fortune if you actually want them doing something. They also need risky and unreliable deployment if you want to make full use of their abilities.

You commonly see 3 riflemen at 1500pts? Interesting meta, and the speeders arent the only things those will be engaged by, or engaging, so really its just the first turn or so you need to worry about.

 

And I count 8-10 effective antitank guns in this list. 3 Typhoons, a Libby, a Vindicator, 2 Meltaguns, 2 Plasmaguns, and a Tactical Squad.

That's where we have a very different opinion. I would only consider the two meltas and demolisher cannon 'good'. My old 1750 had 7 meltas and there were quite a few times when that felt a bit on the low side.

 

ps

Don't know if you made a typo with the dread, they can't take double flamers.

Actually, you can- furiosos can exchange stormbolters for heavy flamers at 10pts.

 

As for the rest... missile launchers are perfectly viable anti-tank weapons. If they werent, SWs wouldnt be one of the top tier armies around the tournament scene. If you rely on melta for all your tank busting I think that you might be hurting your tactical options- 12" is a very limited range, and sometimes a guy just doesnt want to get that close in. Buuuut thats personal taste, and how a list plays up until a point. I like alot of flexability in my lists.

 

Personally, I see us having a hard time against all of the "big three" but who cares!

 

The "big three" are all pretty boring to play except maybe GKs Drago Wing...but that will get old soon enough.

 

If there was no codex GK there would be no problem. Both IG and SW can be dealt with quite well by just using our mobility and get in their face. Try the same thing against GK where you have purifiers or DCAs and you're in for a world of hurt. A strong DoA hybrid that stomps IG and SW will also suffer against some of 'lesser' codexes like CSM, DE and even nids. SW and GK on the other hand doesn't quite have that problem as their strong builds are far less specialized and focus on good scoring, which a lot of tournament missions will reward.

 

I wouldn't consider draigo wing good. While annoying it's a gimmick list with some really bad match ups.

DCAs? Oh, cultists, got it.

 

Youre spot on with less specialization and a focus on good scoring- wich is something a strong BA list should work towards aswell, and what my list there *just something I had floating around* tries to focus on.

 

A grey knight walks into a bar full of blood angels and says you guys suck about sums up the OP's original condescending troll.

 

Its been a useful thread I have learnt a bit, so its far from useless IMO.

Why let the trolls win?

[knife&fork]

You commonly see 3 riflemen at 1500pts? Interesting meta, and the speeders arent the only things those will be engaged by, or engaging, so really its just the first turn or so you need to worry about.

1500 no, 1750 yes. I'm just saying that without the speeders you are lacking a lot of the firepower needed to open transports and thin out scary units. Seems to me like they will become priority targets.

 

Actually, you can- furiosos can exchange stormbolters for heavy flamers at 10pts.

 

As for the rest... missile launchers are perfectly viable anti-tank weapons. If they werent, SWs wouldnt be one of the top tier armies around the tournament scene. If you rely on melta for all your tank busting I think that you might be hurting your tactical options- 12" is a very limited range, and sometimes a guy just doesnt want to get that close in. Buuuut thats personal taste, and how a list plays up until a point. I like alot of flexability in my lists.

One stormbolter, one melta. Only the stormbolter can be exchanged for a flamer. Anymore templates than that and you have to take the frag cannon.

 

I'd say anti transport more than anti tank really. The missile launchers is quite good in all armies but it's better for the wolves than BA since they are more stationary and are generally not in the same hurry to wipe out priority targets as BA is. With melta aplenty for anything that gets close and stuff like living lightning they've got their bases covered anyway.

My list had more anti tank/transport/whatever than the meltas, it's just that those are the only ones I consider somewhat reliable. Can't wait for statistical averages to work their magic, need that executioner tank gone ASAP :)

[spec.ops]

@Ragingchainsword

 

Warmachine & Hordes

[Drunken Angel]

1500 poinnts can easily include 3 psyfleman or 2 psyfleman and a vindicare assassin along with 6-10 psycannons.

I dont mind the psycannons as they can be dropped on and melta'd the more dreads the better we have plenty of tools to deal to them

[AustonT]

Blood Angels aren't competitive what a lark.

[RagingChainsword]

Ah, thanks :)

[Chaplain Admetus]

I wouldn't say BA aren't competitive, not by a long stretch. Won a local 2k army last month with my BA, and it wasn't a soft field. Granted, there are stronger armies out there, but I'm a firm believer in that there is no such thing as a non-competitive army. If you have a competent player, with a list they know well, then they're always going to be dangerous, even if they have one of the older army books. To paraphrase Animal Farm... "all armies are equal, but some armies are more equal than others". Not being the obvious best is no reason to state that they aren't a competitive force.

[Zealadin]

BA aren't generally considered a T1 army because they have a much higher learning curve than the other competitors (SW,GK,IG).

GK also really put the foot into FNP, and adding Halbs is pretty mind wrenching at times for an assault army.

 

Saying they aren't outright competitive though, in the same boat as saying they aren't as bad as Nids? Well some Nids players do REALLY well at events.

 

That being said this seems a strange forum to bring up the point, you aren't going to get really balanced responses here because everyone is a BA player. Not that you'll ever get totally balanced responses anyway.

 

I didn't see the OP's post as a troll, he is just repeating one of the internet's prevailing views.

[The Holy Heretic]

Thank you Zealadin :)

 

- now, I'll just break my promise about butting out of this discussion, but I came up with a little analogy to explain my point.

 

BA are as competitive to 'the big three', as a Lamborghini to a beat up, rusty Toyota pickup truck..

 

The lambo will beat the Toyota on the quarter mile any time.

 

But most driving doesn't happen in the vacuum of a racing strip. Instead it happens in a crowded city, with speed limits, speed bumps, pot holes, traffic lights and kids playing in the street, where the lambo is at a disadvantage from its reduced LOS, and people who on't keep as much distance to it, opposed to the sturdy wreck that looks like its driver couldn't care less about another bump.

 

Will the lambo be able to get through the city faster than the pickup? Sure, with a driver with better knowledge of traffic, roads and routes, but the pickup will be at an advantage. Simple as that.

 

***DISCLAIMER*** - the following can be seen as a provocation and/or 'trolling'. Its not.

 

I come to this forum to learn and to discuss things. I prefer to discuss things from a neutral and rational standpoint without letting emotions cloud my judgement. When popular opinion and experience says BA aren't 'top tier', I say: "Whatever.. It just ups the challenge AKA fun.", the same goes for my Tau and my so-called "non-competitive" GK builds, and guess what: They all win games.

 

But they wouldn't win games, unless I acknowledged that they aren't 'optimized'/'competitive'. They win games, because I try, because I make the most of what I've got, because of lucky dice, and because people don't know how to deal with the non-conformative armies. Do they win all the time? No, half the time is probably more like it, and thats right where I want it. Does the opposing army matter? No, cause they will just as easily annihilate leafblowers, as they will get eaten by 'nids.

 

But when someone asks for 'the most competitive BA unit'. I reckon that they play to and for the win, and in that case I do not recommend the BA army. You might be a fantastic player and know all the ins and outs of the city, but when that Toyota pick up pulls up beside your lamborghini during rush hour, you will have a tougher race than the guy with the better car.

[Deschenus Maximus]

The problem is that BA aren't a beat-up pick up truck. They may seem like that to you (and I really don't understand why), but they just aren't.

 

I'm not saying this because "in my experience they rock" - after all, in some people's experience, Orks/CSM/Nids/Daemons rock. No, I am saying this because BA, when you take the time to do a proper analysis of their abilities, have every single tool they need to be effective.

 

Effective fire support? Check - Autolas preds, devastators, assbacks/plasmabacks

Mobility? Double check - Fast tank hulls and jump pack Troops

Competent assaulters? Check - Priest-supported Assault Marines, which can be supported by specialist assault units, to taste

Durability? Check - Tons of armour made all the more durable by Shield of Sanguinius as well as Feel no Pain easily and cheaply available to infantry.

 

Is it easier to make a bad list with BA? Probably, as we have more "ooh, shiny!" then Knights, Wolves and IG. But when you stick to the fundamentals, they CERTAINLY can compete.

[Morticon]

I didn't see the OP's post as a troll, he is just repeating one of the internet's prevailing views.

 

Zealadin, not sure what the prevailing internet view is?

Maybe that IG/SW/GK are the top dogs?

 

While that may or may not be the case, saying those three are strongest, bestest, most awesomest is arguable - Its open ended, and therefore peeeeerfectly acceptable within the realms of reasonable discussion.

 

The issue a lot of posters here have taken (myself included) is that that's not what Holy Heretic said initially.

That may have even been the intent was (again why I asked - honestly - if it was not a language thing) but instead he stated:

(paraphrased)

"BA are not competitive" - Without context and without qualification. And when shown contrary evidence to the initial statement, it was dismissed.

 

He's gone a long way to explain what he was in fact talking about (and thanks for posting again Heretic! :) ) - which is removed from a blanket and unqualified statement that "BA are not competitive".

 

The majority of posters here are not as interested in arguing that BA are stronger than XYZ, but more against the statement that BA are not competitive.

[The Holy Heretic]

The problem is that BA aren't a beat-up pick up truck. They may seem like that to you (and I really don't understand why), but they just aren't.

 

They're not. They're the lamborghini -_-

[Leonaides]

@holy heretic - I dont thin you analogy is actually any use at all here, other than just confusing things. Apart from anything else, any sane driver would also give the lambo plenty of room in case of an accident - scratch something like that and your own insurance premiums would be sky-high for years! And in city traffic in the UK a Lambo would have the advantage of beign able to pull away better into smaller gaps in traffic and at roundabouts and lights due to power/weight/gearing ratios.

 

And this:

But they wouldn't win games, unless I acknowledged that they aren't 'optimized'/'competitive'. They win games, because I try, because I make the most of what I've got, because of lucky dice, and because people don't know how to deal with the non-conformative armies.

Is the same for any army from any codex. If you have a pally-build GK army and come up against someone who knows how to use his own army to beat it, then you will probably have a elss than 50% chance of winning since you wont be expecting to come up against someone who knows that so you are more likely to make mistakes due to overconfidence. No army will win any game if the player doesnt try to make the most of what they have got, if they dont try and put together a workable list in the first place, if they dont get a decent amount of luck, and it realy helps if theri oopponent doesnt know how to deal with theri army.

[Brother Captain Kezef]

As an GK player AND a BA player who is not an elitist, arrogant troll I'd like to add my thoughts.

 

GK is the FOTM army at the moment, somewhat affected by codex creep and has some strong cookie-cutter builds. It can be described as idiot-proff to a certain extent, especialy in the tounament, win at all costs scene.

 

Blood Angels have amazing tactical flexibility but they are a hard army to master, they need a bit of skill and finesse that is generaly lacking in the mindset of FOTM tourney players.

 

The unfortunate fact, especialy on the internet and the tourney sene is people want an army that is idot proff and can win with the minimum effort and thought. BA is not that army and so they get labeled "second tier", but those who can master the BA will wipe the floor of these FOTM types.

 

I'm looking forward to the DA codex when these FOTM elitists will leave for greener pastures and I apologise to my BA brothers for such nonesense as the OPs arrogance.