Jump to content

Wishful thinking? (New SM dex)


Morticon

Recommended Posts

Yeah we do deserve better i agree, but I guess what I am trying to say is, if you want to have a top tear army and only play BA your going to almost always be disappointed.

 

If we look back over history BA have had very little time on top, a short patch in 3rd ed before the wd dex and a nice competitive period in 5th (definitely not top tier though).

 

In this current environment if you want a top tier army your amry must he water (Bruce lee quote) in other words your army has to change every time Gw changes. You really need to play multiple armies and be satisfied with playing multiples.

 

If like me you are dedicated to only 1 or 2 armies or worse specific lists, you are always going to be disappointed.

 

The way games workshop run things at the moment it really pays not to be out for the best of the best as youll always have to be upgrading or completely rebuilding you army.

 

They really dont encourage loyalty to a single army anymore!

 

Just my 2 cents!

I don't even want to be on top with my BA, I just want them to be roughly on par with vanilla marines in playability and options. I'm personally glad we didn't for example get centurions, as I'm sure a whole bunch of people would've thrown together a list just to put them in our drop pods, with a spray coating of red. I wouldn't use them even if we had them. I'm glad we, or vanilla marines, become the uber broken faction of the month, I'll happily leave that to the filthy space elves and to a lesser extent necrons. Maybe if space elves are the only really retarded powerful codex this edition people will start to realize how stupid "competitive" 40k is.

 

There just isn't a reason at all that some of these changes weren't included in the BA Dex, whereas with DA the problem was just over costing of pretty much everything that screwed them. But now we have a book that is literally not even 6th months old, with unit entries that are vastly different. Maybe GW will impress, and errata all the marine factions up to this standard, but if not, and the rumors are true, vanilla marines now do assault marines with jump packs, and dreads, better than us. And that's literally the reason most people picked up BA in the first place.

 

Cause if not, GW has 2 options, release a entire new BA codex in the next 6 months, which will cause much gnashing of teeth, and rightfully so, or we are stuck with a sub par codex till next edition, just like when 6th hit. Unless you play with non-:cusss who will let you steal the rules updates, GW approved or not.

 

Edit: If I'm cramming to much into this thread, just let me know, I'm home sick and can't sleep.

Why wouldn't it be allowed to be used by everyone? That's how formations work. They can be used in any army. You would just have to watch for the levels of alliance. Since any unit with faction Armies of the Imperium is battle brothers with any other unit from that faction, there shouldn't be any problem.

I suggest that we constantly email GW rule grots with questions like "Can BA furiosos form squads of 3" or "Do Vanguard Veterans get fleet with their heroic intervention" etc. The answer will likely be no but if enough people constantly message them about it, they can at least consider caving and writing an errata to cover it.

 

Kind of a different strategy than mailing them and asking why they hate blood angels.

This! 

 

 

They need to do a formation compilation or something. The disparate sources are getting out of hand and harder to acquire.

They shouldn't publish half finished codices and then charge extra money to get the complete product. But that's not gonna happen.

Yeah it was space marine exclusive previously. However it is effectively 'just' a chaplain and command squad, everything in it is usable for blood angels so I wouldn't read to much into it

 

I wasn't suggesting anything. I just couldn't remember if there was a datasheet somewhere at some point.

Just out of curiosity how many people actually participated?

 

About 25, I think.

 

But by the magic of wishful thinking, at least one Sisters player managed to round that up to several tens of thousands who just hadn't mentioned they were taking part, or something.

Email sent:

 

"Dear Sir,
 
We are currently at a disagreement with other players regarding how changes to unit profiles in the new Codex Adeptus Astartes Space Marines affects Codex Adeptus Astartes Blood Angels armies.  Apparently, profiles for many units have changed.  For example, Space Marine Scouts now have Weapon Skill 4 and Ballistic Skill 4, and Dreadnoughts have Attacks 4 as their profiles.
 
Seeing as Blood Angels also are Codex Adeptus Astartes, am I correct to assume that the shared units have gotten statline changes to match the new Adeptus Astartes Space Marines profiles?
 
In a similar vein, would I be correct to assume that Blood Angels vehicles can also be taken in squadrons?
 
Clarifications would be much appreciated.  Thanks in advance.
 
Kind Regards,"

"PLAY WHAT YOU WANT IN YOUR PLAY GROUPS AT HOME!" will be the answer you get.

 

Unfortunately all my games are either pick up games against strangers or competitive games in tournament settings. So I need a consistent set of current edition rules to use.

 

It would be nice to see an Errata and FAQ released. Things like Vehicle Squadrons, access to the Grav Cannon for Devs/Tacs, Dread and Scout stat updates. Things that make sense as they should be uniform across books.

 

It is really saddening to see people say 'I will wait optimistically for the next Codex' when one came out within the last few months.

You forgot to ask for a pony.

 

You can have grav-cannons and squadrons when you share Tactical heavy flamers, overcharged engines, and the good kind of Predator sponson brackets.

 

Honestly, all I ask for are Scout stat lines and Dreadnought attacks errata.

The idea isn't to get an answer but to force GW to put out an FAQ. They will either concede and update the stats or explicitly state that we don't.

I think most of us already know there ain't no way in hell the Rule Grotz will tell us yes but it may give them pause to consider letting us.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.