Blood Angels for Tournament Play

[DominicJ]

One of the problems with this is that you will rarely be able disrupt a rps list without one of your own.

 

A gunline will suffer against a seven prop list, but a gk termie blob won't. The blob will lose to nine demolisher list, which can't touch nine valkaryie lists etc.

 

I was going to suggest a six assault squad list to demonstrate the movement point, until i realised its just another brained list.

 

Best of luck, but i shall stick to my strategy of avoiding such players.

[Darklighter]

It's all about keeping your eye on the prize. I've played so many games where people have forgotten the objectives and become far to obsessed with playing my army and not the game.

 

I played one game back in 5th where I'd been wiped to a man, a single lone scout Sargent sat on the objective. By the end of the game I'd managed to kill next to nothing of my enemy, but he'd not claimed a single one of the 5 objectives in the game he was so focused on just killing me he'd neglected to move even the one inch it would have taken to claim one of the three objectives he was so very near to.

 

I won the game he claimed a "moral" victory for killing so many of my troops! People seem to claim this allot when they've messed up their game strategy.

[Captain Idaho]

That's so true. Flexible lists win games by playing the mission rather than the opponent whilst optimised lists win by beating the opposing list.

 

Just for record (relevent to a comment previous), you can't throw grenades on overwatch. It explicitly states you can throw a grenade in the shooting phase.

[SamaNagol]

If you can snap fire a grenade you can overwatch with one

[TheHarrower]

If you can snap fire a grenade you can overwatch with one

 

That's how we play it at our store and I don't see why you wouldn't be able to. Throwing a grenade is nothing like manifesting a psychic power.

[Captain Idaho]

Snap fire and overwatch are not the same thing. You can overwatch templates but not snap fire them.

 

The throwing grenade rules state quite explicitly:

 

Only one grenade (of any type) can be thrown by a unit per shooting phase.

 

Nothing in there about being allowed to fire outside the shooting phase.

[TheHarrower]

So if your argument is that throwing a grenade isn't a shooting attack then what is it?

 

EDIT: I forgot the important bits. Page 21: "An Overwatch attack is resolved like a normal shooting attack and uses all the normal rules for range, line of sight, cover saves and so on. Any shots fired as Overwatch can only be fire as Snap Shots."

 

Page 13: "If a model is forced to make Snap Shots rather than shoot normally, then its Ballistic Skill is counted as being 1 for the purpose of those shots."

 

I don't see a problem.

[Captain Idaho]

The circumstances you can throw a grenade are stipulated quite black and white I'm afraid. The Shooting phase. It's a special attack. It's the same as Witchfire Pscyhic attacks are used in the shooting phase yet can't be used as overwatch.

 

If we want to talk about it further then we best bring it up in the Official Rules section though, or else Morticon or JamesI will melt us both.

[Deschenus Maximus]

That's so true. Flexible lists win games by playing the mission rather than the opponent whilst optimised lists win by beating the opposing list.

 

I don't see why this should be true at all. For example, the list CAG posted in his OP is perfectly capable of playing the objective game. It will have a disadvantage in Purge the Alien, but them's the breaks - can't be strong everywhere all at the same time.

[CitadelArmyGuy]

Okay all, the Battle Report that demonstrates the OODA Loop in action is posted here: http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/index.p...howtopic=262266

 

Comments specific to that battle can be made there, but lets keep OODA Loop and Flexibility discussions here in this thread. Thanks guys, I'm glad everyone seems to like this.

[CitadelArmyGuy]

...this will help more people the closer we can take it from a nebulous idea to something that has more of a definition (but not to set boundaries).

For my general ideas on increasing flexibility in a given Blood Angel list, here are some personal thoughts. The list is by no means exhaustive, nor will every point work for every player. Most of the players on this forum will be familiar with most of this. But in general, and for me personally:

 

EDIT: LIST MOVED TO END OF ORIGINAL POST.

[ianj253]

What preds do you think allow more flexibility, Baals or regular?

[Morticon]

CaG - you should write up a tactica and include that last part. Its very, very beneficial.

 

 

edit: As a side note, its very, very rarely that I agree with everything (or even most of what) a poster says regarding army tactics/suggestions/advice online. Many people fall into the trap of speaking too much to or being overly influence by local meta, or lack a bit of broad conceptual perspective and as a result feel that their situation is universal. I didnt get that from these comments at all, and honestly feel the same way about all of the points. Huge :)

[Chaplain Admetus]

[*]The core of the vast majority of my lists begin with 20 Jump Assault Marines and a Jump Sanguinary Priest.

[*]Mephiston > than any other two Independant Characters. Caveat: Jump Librarian and Jump Priest may provide better Force Multipliers if your list contains 20+ Jump Marines.

 

This is exactly what I'm attempting to prove with my list. I know that objectively, Mephiston is a house, and is absolutely the best bang-for-your-buck HQ choice in our codex. However, since my list runs 2 full-strength assault squads, I tend to run librarian and priest in his place as it offers more flexibility.

 

In fact, from reading the list more thoroughly, this seems to be very similar to how I field and play my BA. I must admit, I hadn't considered reserving my rhino-mounted tactical squad - that gives me something to try out this afternoon.

 

@ianj253 - I'll (temporarily) hijack the question since I'm here - I've found the Baal pred with as many bullets as possible (assault cannon and twin h-b sponsons) offers the most flexibility. With a bit of luck it can kill any tank with rending (6 followed by a 5 or 6 will penetrate AV14) if you find yourself in a tight spot, but it really shines at dropping medium infantry (4+ save or worse it will rip to bits, 3+ save it can still take down a reasonable amount through sheer weight of firepower), and light vehicles or transports can often be glanced to death in one phase alone.

[TheHarrower]

For my general ideas on increasing flexibility in a given Blood Angel list, here are some personal thoughts. The list is by no means exhaustive, nor will every point work for every player. Most of the players on this forum will be familiar with most of this.

 

This is exactly what I meant and I think this is perfect! Thanks for sharing. I wish some other people would add their thoughts. One question I had:

 

[*]The #1 best diversion-maker available is any unit in a drop-pod. Almost all builds can benefit from a single drop-podded Unit; think very hard if you mean to include 2-4 pods. The best pod inclusions for any list are 1 or 5+. 1 will be precision diversion maker, 5+ will be an Alphastrike list.

 

Can you elaborate on why you think the best is either 1 or 5+ pods?

 

I have a list now with 2 diversion units in pods that drop on turn 1. First unit is a Furioso w/ Frag Cannon, Heavy Flamer. Second unit is 9 Death Company with a Reclusiarch. I have a 3rd pod that I can drop empty or drop in a DC Dread w/ talons (DC Dread can also come in with a Storm Raven).

 

Are 2 diversions too much or do you only count on disrupting your opponent for 1 turn so you can move everything else into position?

[Leonaides]

Presumably its either a diversion tactic (1 pod) or your main force (5+ pods) - doing 2 pods is probably not twice as much use as 1 pod when it also costs you more of your main force. 2 units in pods isnt enough to survive on their own if the enemy decides to kill them.

[JamesI]

CAG, love your tactica. Just wonderful.

 

Assuming Morticon hasn't done it yet, I'm going to add this thread to the BA resources thread.

[SamaNagol]

Presumably its either a diversion tactic (1 pod) or your main force (5+ pods) - doing 2 pods is probably not twice as much use as 1 pod when it also costs you more of your main force. 2 units in pods isnt enough to survive on their own if the enemy decides to kill them.

 

It is the way you deal with the threat as well. In his case a Furioso and DC take up different resources to kill. So do not cause a great deal more distraction and cannot cause much damage when they come on

[Arryn]

How about 2 podding frag cannon/heavy flamer furi's? Thats gotta be good for first blood. Target a troop choice to limit their scoring opportunities...

[CitadelArmyGuy]

Presumably its either a diversion tactic (1 pod) or your main force (5+ pods) - doing 2 pods is probably not twice as much use as 1 pod when it also costs you more of your main force. 2 units in pods isnt enough to survive on their own if the enemy decides to kill them.

Yes precisely. Its no secret that 1,3,5+ are the optimal numbers for pods. Obviously those translate into Turn 1 arrival of 1,2,3+ pods. So having 2 pods arrive on Turn 1 is directly tied to the points level of the game. In very large games, one pod may not create enough of a diversion and the cost of two pods won't bite too heavily into your conventional forces. It is up to a player to determine what points-size they feel that is.

 

How about 2 podding frag cannon/heavy flamer furi's? Thats gotta be good for first blood. Target a troop choice to limit their scoring opportunities...

Of all the points I made, I think my comment about 2-4 Pods has the most exceptions possible. There are many cases you could make for and against-- I simply contend that you have to truly think heavily before you make that decision to use other than 1 or 5+.

 

For example, a list with 2 Pod FC/HF Furioso's usually will play even better with 3+ ...... Knife&Fork's list over on the Army subforum (link) really grasps the idea by the horns and I've followed that thread with great applause and humor; such a fun list and he's making it work to-boot! lol

[CitadelArmyGuy]

An amazing player has many hours of game experience to provide referential templates, he understands the difference between Tactics and Strategy, and he understands that Objective is the most important principle of warfare when it comes to 40k.

 

I've been getting some PMs asking about the said difference between Tactics and Strategy. I put this paragraph over in the DA Forum, but realized it will make a good addition to this thread to help add some definition to the ideas behind Flexibility:

 

There is a distinct difference between Tactical Flexibility and Strategic Flexibility. The term Tactical refers to something lasting 1 or 2 Turns (ie 'Tricks', combos, formations, special maneuvers, etcetcetc), and the term Strategic refers to a player's overall approach to winning that whole match. It gets interesting when you have Strategic Tactics (ie Diversions, sometimes Ambushes or Fixes) versus Attack/Defense Tactics but for the most part you treat them separately. The best way to think about it is that the tactics you employ should always promote your strategy.

 

So for any given Unit, discussing its Tactical Flexibility is a combination of the Range of Targets it can successfully engage and the List of Tactics they are apt to employ.

 

Discussing Strategic Flexibility for a single Unit will refer to its Points Cost, its raw Mobility, its Tactical Flexibility (yes, one is a subset of the other) and more esoterically how it interacts with the rest of your Army List. Strategically Flexible lists are able to switch 'how they will win' a game in the middle of that match, rather than choosing a 'Turn 0' strategy and riding that one strategy all the way through into a win or loss. Points-Cost plays into this because cheap units allow for more Units selected which increases available per-Turn actions. Mobility is obvious because, well, Maneuver Warfare. Tactical Flexibility is the high-winner when people discuss Army-Listing because it has a clear and tangible result on the tabletop (elimination of opposing units).

[Storm Dragons 3rd Company]

CAG,

 

Do you think it would be fair to say that the OODA-less list focuses on objective criteria, i.e. pure mathematics? Whereas the balanced list requires focus on subjective factors such as synergy, flexibility, etc.?

 

Second, your discussion of Maneuver reminded me of one of Adm. Jackie Fisher's dictums when he designed the HMS Dreadnought, the first all-big-gun ship. After the guns themselves, he required her to have speed above all else. This was because Dreadnought was designed and trained to fight at range and the ship with superior speed could usually choose the range at which the battle would be fought. Likewise, the more maneuverable army in 40K, while it doesn't have the unlimited sea upon which to maneuver, is better positioned to chose tempo and time of the engagement as well as to to create mass at the point of decisive contact.

 

Dan

[Emicus]

Threadomancy engaged.

I just had to say BRAVO; amazing post!

[TheHarrower]

Threadomancy engaged.

I just had to say BRAVO; amazing post!

 

Indeed. I miss CAG. His posts really sharpened my skills and I won a few tournaments and placed in some others due to his advice.

[Ushtarador]

Same, he really helped me a lot in my early days :) stop having a life CAG srsly! :O