Charlo Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 I wouldn't say fully invalidated, we just have a bit more of a stronger more restrictive flavour than our other brothers. I think depending on how the DA release goes is how mad we should be... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyle_Haydon Posted June 15, 2015 Share Posted June 15, 2015 I wouldn't say fully invalidated, we just have a bit more of a stronger more restrictive flavour than our other brothers. I think depending on how the DA release goes is how mad we should be... It's okay if it makes us mad. We already wrestle with the Red Thirst right..? We'll just have to keep converting that anger into retribution! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kriegsmaschine Posted June 15, 2015 Share Posted June 15, 2015 I've gone from being extremely upset yesterday and this morning to calmer in the afternoon in the belief that surely there will be an errata to bring things like scouts and dreds up to standard and if not I can just re arrange the BA army I've recently been building ( arrrrggggghhhh!!!) and maybe take some some c:sm as allies. Then I read the whole skyhammer thing and boy did I feel the black rage then lemme tell ya. I'm not sure what I'll do at this point in time, probably keep painting and wait on my next and probably last blood angels order that should top me off to an 1850pt list. I was planning on collecting some other armies at some point though so I might get stuck into this sooner. edit- I actually feel pretty foolish I already knew about how GW operates and I started collecting and playing again anyway., what can I say I really love playing 40k mostly for the fluff but also for the fun you can have playing and painting, It helps take your mind off your wallet being ferociously gouged. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlo Posted June 15, 2015 Share Posted June 15, 2015 There's knowing how they operate, and there's expecting the tiniest modicum of common sense from a multinational company who, even though they say they are primarily a model company, still have a lot of people who rely on thier rules. All I know is I'll probably be running a mad mix (furious charge :P) of vanilla, BA, SW for TWC (seeing as I'm going to convert up some cool count as chariots...) and hell, some DA if they turn out cool! Only real problem I have is do I just paint my vanilla the same scheme or add a new chapter? Probably the same, nothing ever stopped me from flitting between the old chapter traits so I'll just treat it as that for now. DC dreads will forever be count as Ironclads though since we lost the extra attacks rule... Dat AV13 front and side :O Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bartali Posted June 15, 2015 Share Posted June 15, 2015 I've gone from being extremely upset yesterday and this morning to calmer in the afternoon in the belief that surely there will be an errata to bring things like scouts and dreds up to standard and if not I can just re arrange the BA army I've recently been building ( arrrrggggghhhh!!!) and maybe take some some c:sm as allies. Then I read the whole skyhammer thing and boy did I feel the black rage then lemme tell ya. I'm not sure what I'll do at this point in time, probably keep painting and wait on my next and probably last blood angels order that should top me off to an 1850pt list. I was planning on collecting some other armies at some point though so I might get stuck into this sooner. edit- I actually feel pretty foolish I already knew about how GW operates and I started collecting and playing again anyway., what can I say I really love playing 40k mostly for the fluff but also for the fun you can have playing and painting, It helps take your mind off your wallet being ferociously gouged. If you do play for fun and fluff, then hopefully you play with like minded players. Ask if you can use the updated SM rules for Vanguard, Terminators, Scouts and Dreads. In addition, Skyhammer is just as valid for you to take as it is for a SM player. Paint them up as Blood Drinkers or other codex adherent BA successor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
appiah4 Posted June 16, 2015 Share Posted June 16, 2015 I still think BA Tacticals are better than C:SM Tacticals, and we have pretty good HQs that are worth taking. In contrast, C:SM have some nicely updated units and better scouts. My solution will be to use C:BA with C:SM allies. They will all be BA models, of course - but my Heavy Support dreadnoughts, terminators and scouts will come from C:SM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kriegsmaschine Posted June 16, 2015 Share Posted June 16, 2015 In retrospect I was being a big girls blouse when I made my previous post, I really like blood angels this is the army I want to use for better or worse. It is good in a way all these things coming up, it's made me look at all the different units in the BA codex and how I could field lots of different stuff whilst keeping a core of units that I really like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bukimimaru Posted June 16, 2015 Author Share Posted June 16, 2015 I'm not saying I wouldnt love it if we got a nice update saying we can use the cheaper Terms and better scouts etc, but the point remains, just becuase one or two other dex's got better, that doesnt make us any worse. That being said, when ALL the other codexs get better and we stay the same, thats when we gotta worry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cronhour Posted June 16, 2015 Share Posted June 16, 2015 I'm not saying I wouldnt love it if we got a nice update saying we can use the cheaper Terms and better scouts etc, but the point remains, just becuase one or two other dex's got better, that doesnt make us any worse. That being said, when ALL the other codexs get better and we stay the same, thats when we gotta worry. Well, technically does as the average power level increases our place drops. That being said I just plan to use Ba with marines, supplement what we do well (punchy and melta) with some sm allies. I'm thinking fists with lots of shooty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
appiah4 Posted June 16, 2015 Share Posted June 16, 2015 I'm not saying I wouldnt love it if we got a nice update saying we can use the cheaper Terms and better scouts etc, but the point remains, just becuase one or two other dex's got better, that doesnt make us any worse. That being said, when ALL the other codexs get better and we stay the same, thats when we gotta worry. Well, technically does as the average power level increases our place drops. That being said I just plan to use Ba with marines, supplement what we do well (punchy and melta) with some sm allies. I'm thinking fists with lots of shooty. I'll just ally in an Iron Hands Techmarine, Scouts and some Dreadnoughts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meniscusmike Posted June 16, 2015 Share Posted June 16, 2015 To be honest I think the difference in point and rule on the same units are negligible we still have many things that make BA unique. For everyone crying why we don't have the same stuff I notice no-one is asking for the loss of meltas and free drop pod on assault squads of loss of heavy flamer on tacs! Strangely enough we just want the benefits and all the stuff that are BA unique! Objectively they are separate codexes and sure we can argue if internal balance of codexes is a valid point or not, but the way I see it it's like crying that we don't get wraith knights or waveserpants! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlo Posted June 16, 2015 Share Posted June 16, 2015 As a rule, the crying is usually the vocal minority. It's just dreads, scouts, vehicle squads and a decent decurion option (but we do have FTSF...) bringing in line that we need. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meniscusmike Posted June 16, 2015 Share Posted June 16, 2015 But that's just it! Do we actually NEED it? I know it's not ideal but does it really make that much of a difference? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlo Posted June 16, 2015 Share Posted June 16, 2015 Yes, it's a matter of principle really. We need to make a fuss to GW to show that it's not right they have descriencies between books on the same units (unique options obviously not withstanding), but it makes no sense why our combat optimised dreads doesnt have as many attacks as a vanilla rifleman... Obviously you aren't too fussed by it, that's okay, and a fair opinion, but the issues are there. Why should we have to have something subpar, unfluffy or over costed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spagunk Posted June 16, 2015 Share Posted June 16, 2015 To be honest I think the difference in point and rule on the same units are negligible we still have many things that make BA unique. For everyone crying why we don't have the same stuff I notice no-one is asking for the loss of meltas and free drop pod on assault squads of loss of heavy flamer on tacs! Strangely enough we just want the benefits and all the stuff that are BA unique! Objectively they are separate codexes and sure we can argue if internal balance of codexes is a valid point or not, but the way I see it it's like crying that we don't get wraith knights or waveserpants! I can't agree with your argument. Primarily because what we gain versus what C:SM has is not 1:1. No one is asking for everything, they just want certain core units to be equal. What do we gain for scouts that necessitates a 3bs and 3ws? What do we gain for Vanguard Vets that means we're not as good as those in C:SM? What did we gain for dreads that require us to have half the attacks of a standard dread? etc. It's these kind of questions that causes some of us to feel perturbed about this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucumon Posted June 16, 2015 Share Posted June 16, 2015 I think the formation access is of bigger issue than stat line differences. Fluff-wise, the BA are an Astartes chapter... meaning they have the same-ish structure as smurfs, White Scars, etc. If that is the case, why do we not have access to the same formations? The Skyhammer Annihilation Force is a good example of this... this is 10x better than the Angel's Wrath formation. I'm ok, from a fluff perspective, with having different stat-lines that may reflect how the chaper' idiosyncracies are reflected. Or how we have access to overcharged engines... From a Tournament competitive perspective... it seems to be about formation mix. I am thinking that I will run the Skyhammer Annihilation Force with Angel's Fury to see how that goes at 1850.... potentially 70 marines in that force! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meniscusmike Posted June 16, 2015 Share Posted June 16, 2015 Because internal balance, like I said they are SEPERATE codexes after all. I'm not saying it's a great reason but it is A reason! I'm quite philosophical about the whole thing and even looking forward to trying out the new dex, I guess in the bit scheme of things I just don't think it's too big of a deal :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucumon Posted June 16, 2015 Share Posted June 16, 2015 Because internal balance, like I said they are SEPERATE codexes after all. I'm not saying it's a great reason but it is A reason! From a fluff perspective, I don't like the idea that I cant take the cool formations. From a gaming perspective, 7th ed is not a game you play with one formation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meniscusmike Posted June 16, 2015 Share Posted June 16, 2015 Because internal balance, like I said they are SEPERATE codexes after all. I'm not saying it's a great reason but it is A reason! From a fluff perspective, I don't like the idea that I cant take the cool formations. From a gaming perspective, 7th ed is not a game you play with one formation. Don't get me wrong I would love to have the sky hammer formation in fact I'm trying very hard to fit it into a list in thinking of I was however replying to spagunk before you ninja-ed me! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlo Posted June 16, 2015 Share Posted June 16, 2015 My favuorite part is that we have a Demi-Battle company formation like marines, but ours is a cruel joke that actually offers us nothing compared to a BSF! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rezin70 Posted June 16, 2015 Share Posted June 16, 2015 I dont care about formations, just make the stat lines the same jeez.Im more of a fluff/flavor player. This really messes with my mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vel'Cona Posted June 16, 2015 Share Posted June 16, 2015 Gotta echo your post there, Charlo. BA should have gotten a similar Battle Company bonus if not access to the majority of the Gladius Strike Force detachment and formations. While we do get several unique and reasonably powerful formations, it seems like GW is going back to their tried-and-true "power creep" style by having the formations get more and more powerful with each release. As an example of this progression, look at the Necron Decurion, Adeptus Mechanicus War Convocation and finally the Gladius Strike Force. It really does seem that releases are moving toward a new "tier" of power, and codices are becoming obsolete at a far faster pace than in prior editions. Let's keep a weather eye open on C:DA; I have a feeling there's going to be more than a few sad pandas after that codex lands! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlo Posted June 16, 2015 Share Posted June 16, 2015 Yeah, C:DA will be the benchmark for me. I've not actually seen Any Wolves reactions to the C:SM, but I imagine with CotGW and all their legitimately cool stuff they are still content, probably not the lot who will be wanting a "Demi-Battle Company" etc. Don't know if you've seen the rumours but I think DA are going to have BS2 overwatch or something. I think what will be interesting if they got a "chapter tactic" ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrunTeufel Posted June 16, 2015 Share Posted June 16, 2015 You know what I would really like? The new techmarines. For 65 points you get a 2 wound character with an artificer armor and a power axe that can repair stuff. And you can give him a servo harness for a reasonable amount which gives him better offense and improves his repairing abilities. For 90 point he is awesome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
appiah4 Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 You know what I would really like? The new techmarines. For 65 points you get a 2 wound character with an artificer armor and a power axe that can repair stuff. And you can give him a servo harness for a reasonable amount which gives him better offense and improves his repairing abilities. For 90 point he is awesome. I'll be allying a Red SM detachment with a boltgun and servo arm Techmarine and SM scots, dreadnoughts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.