Fluff hunting: BA and CQC

[Indefragable]

Long story short I was talking about how BA are "supposed to be the loyalist Chapter most renowned for their Close Quarters Combat/melee combat abilities." Another member of my club (the leader, actually) ten walked over and went into a mini-tirade about how Blood Angels simple prefer CQC but are no "better" than any other Chapter at it.

 

This insult shall not stand!

 

So it's kind of my own fault since I was griping about how crunch wise BA are only good when we get the Charge off instead of being good at melee in general, so I somewhat stepped in it. However, this is a slight that can not be ignored (granted it was said in a friendly bantering say, but that's not important right now).

 

What I am asking if you, fellow Sons of Sanguinius, is help digging up specific passages from Codexes (past or present), supplements, novels, etc... Anything that states in writing that the BA are particularly good at melee combat.

 

We all know it instinctually but it's time to accumulate some cold, hard evidence that can not be refuted.

 

Battle Brothers, I thank you in advance for your efforts!

[CaptainStabby]

There's a page of fluff in the 2E... Wargear book I want to say, about a Blood Angel squad storming a traitor guard bunker and murdering the hell out of them all and then basically scaring the crap out of the Loyal Guard commander who suggested they might need more men to do so. It's heavily implied that the action is all close quarters choppydeath. And explosions.

[Blindhamster]

BA aren't technically better at it in the fluff, their curse just makes them predisposed to it.

[Firepower]

There's a page of fluff in the 2E... Wargear book I want to say, about a Blood Angel squad storming a traitor guard bunker and murdering the hell out of them all and then basically scaring the crap out of the Loyal Guard commander who suggested they might need more men to do so. It's heavily implied that the action is all close quarters choppydeath. And explosions.

 

"How do we prove that the Angels are the best melee fighters?"

 

"Because they slaughtered a room full of guardsmen!"

 

:teehee:

 

I know the short story you're talking about, actually.  It's in the Angels of Death dex, but it was in one or two other books, too.

 

Anyway, "better" is something of a relative term.  More skillful?  I can't think of any definitive bits off the top of my head that would prove it, but I don't have every chunk of fluff committed to memory word for word.  However, they are more savage in close combat than anyone else (hush Wolves) which arguably translates as "better."  Like how Death Company are "better" because they're frenzied beyond what even a Marine should be able to do, in part because they can (or rather can't help but) focus entirely on offense thanks to their durability.  One could also argue the Angels are better simply because it's their bread and butter.  Like, White Scars are the best riders around, because they focus on it almost exclusively from day 1.  

[Rune_Priest_Rhapsody]

"How do we prove that the Angels are the best melee fighters?"

 

"Because they slaughtered a room full of guardsmen!"

 

:teehee:

 

...(hush Wolves)...

LoL

and

...we are always watching, Templar!!

[Arkangilos]

I would say a few things. The first being that the more one practices a particular style of war, the better they become at it. So if one person has a tendency far greater than anyone else to do close combat, they will be better at it than others.

 

Now, I will go into a few lore bits...

 

"All Space Marines are held in awe and dread by the citizens of the Imperium. To most they are aloof: distant avenging angels who bring ruination and destruction upon the heads of the Emperor's Enemies. Yet even amongst the battle-eager Space Marines of the Adeptus Astartes, the Blood Angels have a fearsome reputation." ~ Codex: Blood Angels, 3rd Edition, p. 2

 

"Why Collect a Blood Angels Army?

Like all Space Marine armies, the best reason for collecting a Blood Angels army is that they're simply the hardest, toughest warriors in the 41st millennium! The Blood Angels in particular excel at close quarter fighting and hand to hand"~ Codex: Blood Angels, 3rd Edition, p. 2

 

"As a chapter, the Blood Angels excel at close quarter fighting. Even amongst these supreme fighters, there are those who martial skills put them above their battle brothers." 3rd edition, page 7.

 

"They are comprised of those battle-brothers newly graduated from the Scout Squads, hot-tempered killers whose natural affinity is for the bloody release of hand to hand combat." ~7th ed, page 82, Assault Squad.

[SpecialIssue]

I will always claim that the genetics of each Space Marine lineage will never predispose any chapter to having greater potential power in any form of warfare. There is no raw boost to melee combat power simply for having Sanguinus' bloodline in you, or even more weirdly, siege-breaking skills for having Dorn's blood. Instead, geneseed differences will mostly manifest in the temperament and therefore focus different lineages will place on certain facets of warfare. Thus, aptitude is built naturally through focussed training and psychological compatibility.

 

Provided they were given the same training opportunities and time, if a Blood Angel or Space Wolf had the state of mind and intent to become a siege breaker or infiltrator, they would have just as much potential as any Imperial Fist or Raven Guard; and vice versa in close quarters. There are definitely these types in every chapter, company and squad - Marines are full spectrum warriors, and they do have their own (to an extent) personalities and independent gifts that will have been elevated with them into post-humanity.

 

I do not want to see every bloodline shoehorned into having gifts that grant them what I feel are unearned special powers, while making them utterly one-dimensional tropes.

 

Edit: said things already said

[Charlo]

We have a tendency to fight cqc so we do it a lot, so we get better, so we fight more, and get better. It's a circle really.

[Indefragable]

I would say a few things. The first being that the more one practices a particular style of war, the better they become at it. So if one person has a tendency far greater than anyone else to do close combat, they will be better at it than others.

 

Now, I will go into a few lore bits...

 

"All Space Marines are held in awe and dread by the citizens of the Imperium. To most they are aloof: distant avenging angels who bring ruination and destruction upon the heads of the Emperor's Enemies. Yet even amongst the battle-eager Space Marines of the Adeptus Astartes, the Blood Angels have a fearsome reputation." ~ Codex: Blood Angels, 3rd Edition, p. 2

 

"Why Collect a Blood Angels Army?

Like all Space Marine armies, the best reason for collecting a Blood Angels army is that they're simply the hardest, toughest warriors in the 41st millennium! The Blood Angels in particular excel at close quarter fighting and hand to hand"~ Codex: Blood Angels, 3rd Edition, p. 2

 

"As a chapter, the Blood Angels excel at close quarter fighting. Even amongst these supreme fighters, there are those who martial skills put them above their battle brothers." 3rd edition, page 7.

 

"They are comprised of those battle-brothers newly graduated from the Scout Squads, hot-tempered killers whose natural affinity is for the bloody release of hand to hand combat." ~7th ed, page 82, Assault Squad.

 

This is great! Just the kind of stuff I am looking for. I am still combing through 7th ed Codex and will post what I find as well.

 

Thanks for your assistance!

[Indefragable]

I will always claim that the genetics of each Space Marine lineage will never predispose any chapter to having greater potential power in any form of warfare. There is no raw boost to melee combat power simply for having Sanguinus' bloodline in you, or even more weirdly, siege-breaking skills for having Dorn's blood. Instead, geneseed differences will mostly manifest in the temperament and therefore focus different lineages will place on certain facets of warfare. Thus, aptitude is built naturally through focussed training and psychological compatibility.

 

Provided they were given the same training opportunities and time, if a Blood Angel or Space Wolf had the state of mind and intent to become a siege breaker or infiltrator, they would have just as much potential as any Imperial Fist or Raven Guard; and vice versa in close quarters. There are definitely these types in every chapter, company and squad - Marines are full spectrum warriors, and they do have their own (to an extent) personalities and independent gifts that will have been elevated with them into post-humanity.

 

I do not want to see every bloodline shoehorned into having gifts that grant them what I feel are unearned special powers, while making them utterly one-dimensional tropes.

 

Edit: said things already said

 

I agree with the basis of your point. It's a classic nature vs nurture argument. Sigismund is a perfect example: if Imperial Fists were "the best with bolters" why do they have one of the best hand-to-hand combatants in all the Legions? Having certain geneseed does not guarantee that you will be "better" at something...but it does help. Like being the child of two Olympic athlete parents: you may grow up to be a violinist instead, but you would probably have a bit better metabolism/healthier regimen growing up that would make it a bit easier for you to get into athletics should you ever go that direction. 

 

And I am not solely focusing on genetics either. I mean from an Organizational perspective as well, taking into account doctrine, culture, strategy, "playbook," etc...

As others have pointed out, experience breeds skill and so a Chapter that is frequently laying siege (or defending in one) will over time become better as an organization at that type of warfare because of that collective experience. And that experience becomes comfort and so forth. 

 

Another example would be the Blood Angel's friendly? rivals during the Great Crusade: the War Hounds/World Eaters: not every Astarte in the XII Legion was a slobbering crazed berzerker...but as an organization they would favor the all-out charge where the many berzerkers (even pre-Chaos they were "berzerkers" in the classic sense) in their ranks could have the most effect. Success breeds success so they would continue with this strategy until it became their go-to. And any non-berzerkers in the World Eater ranks would feel pressure to adopt that style of combat in order to keep up with their peers, so on and so forth.

 

Where I am going with all this is to say that of all the Loyalist Chapter, the Blood Angels are the most focused/"best" in melee combat, regardless of whether that skill/focus/pre-disposition comes from genetics, doctrine, training regimen, climate, leadership, or some combination of any of those. 

[Leonaides]

That rivalry with the World Eaters is also an indicator of Blood Angels close combat credentials (for want of a better term) - we were the ones who Horus used to instil rivalry with the World Eaters. Our CC ability as a legion was the equal to theirs and our bloodshed no less, if more targeted at actual enemies (not just anything twitching in the killzone).

[Sabadin]

Don't forget as the fluff currently sits, until it likely gets retconned later, At the battle of Terra daemon Angron went all "NOPE!! I'm fighting somewhere else" just from making eye contact with an angry Sanguinious. That's quite a legacy of combat prowess to be passing down the genetic line.

[Firepower]

Gene-seed alone doesn't make a Marine better at any one particular skill set, no.  It does tend to instill certain proclivities, yes.  But remember that those proclivities have existed for thousands of years.  Fists are siege experts because they've been doing it for ages, Blood Angels are close combat experts because they've been doing it for ages, etc.  You have a bottomless well of experience to draw on, gear and Chapter structure bent towards the specialty, and even Chapter dogma reinforcing it.

 

It's not as though Blood Angels don't have devastator squads, but they've always been the premiere assault chapter in fluff as well as rules*.  It's not some new attempt to shoehorn and pigeon hole every Chapter, but rather something that was established right off the bat in the Angels of Death codex.

 

* While there are at times better armies for assault on the tabletop, the intent of BA dexes is always to be first among equals as a CC dedicated army.

[Omega-soul]

Actualy - I should  disappoint you - Blood angels are not best melee combatants.

Blood angels - are best Assault combatants - and  there is a quite distinction.

Sanguinius  himself  drove his sons from this way of becoming another world eaters - he directed legion into more thoughtful way of waging the war and therefore more tactical, relying on mission plan rather than personal skills.

This transits into a specific doctrine including mobility, intensive short range fire and a close combat tool of course.

 

But talking about personal skills  there is a good  story about a rivalry between angels versus eaters and emperors children.

I  don't  remember  what was the name of story but the thing  is -  there  was   a   duel between  Khârn and Nasir Amit (Flesh tearer chapter master  soon-to-be) and Lucius versus Azkaellon (Captain of Sanguinary guard) both of which ended in a draw.

Giving a clue that  Blood angels at least  equal for  those legions known for close combat mastery and savagery

[Firepower]

Legion wise, no, probably not (or rather there wasn't a single hands-down supreme CC Legion).  Loyalist Chapter, or at least First Founding, yes.

[Indefragable]

Actualy - I should  disappoint you - Blood angels are not best melee combatants.

Blood angels - are best Assault combatants - and  there is a quite distinction.

Sanguinius  himself  drove his sons from this way of becoming another world eaters - he directed legion into more thoughtful way of waging the war and therefore more tactical, relying on mission plan rather than personal skills.

This transits into a specific doctrine including mobility, intensive short range fire and a close combat tool of course.

 

But talking about personal skills  there is a good  story about a rivalry between angels versus eaters and emperors children.

I  don't  remember  what was the name of story but the thing  is -  there  was   a   duel between  Khârn and Nasir Amit (Flesh tearer chapter master  soon-to-be) and Lucius versus Azkaellon (Captain of Sanguinary guard) both of which ended in a draw.

Giving a clue that  Blood angels at least  equal for  those legions known for close combat mastery and savagery

 

Right. There will always be individuals that stand out (think a great Running Back on an American football team that is oriented towards the passing game...), but there are traditions and tendencies throughout each Legion/Chapter. Nothing says that the best Techmarine in all the Legions didn't come from the Blood Angels, for example...but it's highly unlikely. That's what I am getting at. 

 

And Omega, I think your anecdote reinforces my point in many ways: the single best-of-the-best-of-the-best melee combatants from 2 separate Legions could only get to a draw with TWO members of the Blood Angels. That says something...

 

...although supposedly Raldoran was even better? According to the Lexicanum (looking for link), the 4 "most formidable Astartes in all the Legions" were:

 

Ezekyle Abaddon of the Luna Wolves/Sons of Horus

Sigismund of the Imperial Fists

Jago Sevatarion of the Night Lords

Raldoran of the Blood Angels

 

...but that's a peeing contest for a whole other conversation....

[Indefragable]

Legion wise, no, probably not (or rather there wasn't a single hands-down supreme CC Legion).  Loyalist Chapter, or at least First Founding, yes.

 

 

Right. Again, this is not an end-all-be-all. But they are sort of the gold-standard for all other Chapters to be compared to when it comes to CQC abilities. Some may be "better" in some ways, some may be worse, etc... but all will be pegged against the BA one way or another just like any Chapters or SM units out there will be contrasted with the Imperial Fists in some way, shape, or form when it comes to Siege defense or holding a patch of gravel somewhere in the galaxy. 

Don't forget as the fluff currently sits, until it likely gets retconned later, At the battle of Terra daemon Angron went all "NOPE!! I'm fighting somewhere else" just from making eye contact with an angry Sanguinious. That's quite a legacy of combat prowess to be passing down the genetic line.

 

Do you have the source of that anecdote? I have heard it as well but I am trying to track down the specific origins of all this stuff. 

[Dont-Be-Haten]

Actualy - I should  disappoint you - Blood angels are not best melee combatants.

Blood angels - are best Assault combatants - and  there is a quite distinction.

Sanguinius  himself  drove his sons from this way of becoming another world eaters - he directed legion into more thoughtful way of waging the war and therefore more tactical, relying on mission plan rather than personal skills.

This transits into a specific doctrine including mobility, intensive short range fire and a close combat tool of course.

 

But talking about personal skills  there is a good  story about a rivalry between angels versus eaters and emperors children.

I  don't  remember  what was the name of story but the thing  is -  there  was   a   duel between  Khârn and Nasir Amit (Flesh tearer chapter master  soon-to-be) and Lucius versus Azkaellon (Captain of Sanguinary guard) both of which ended in a draw.

Giving a clue that  Blood angels at least  equal for  those legions known for close combat mastery and savagery

I think when the Legion/Sanguinius fights Ka'Bandha it really changes for the Blood Angels. Not to mention those who over come the Black Rage become changed and  unlock some latent potential within themselves. 2 immediate Examples being Mephiston and Rafen. Next being Lemartes, to an extent. We can also look at Dante, who slew a freak'n Avatar, and the Sanguinor who straight cleaves through Daemons, Astartes,  etc.

 

For the less named characters it is a mix of perspective. In the Night Lords omnibus they are recalled as being excellent marksmen from before, and the newer Astartes showing more ferocity than originally recalled. So it really depends on interpretation. You have to remember the Legiones Astartes were known as Legion, for their numbers swelled and had no known number that could be counted. 

 

We see this even amongst successor chapters, some show greater signs of their progenitor and some stray away from it. Best examples I can recall are the Imperial fist, and Black Templars. Next might be the Raptors and Raven Guard, Marine's Errant, Howling Griffins, and NovaMarines, and now the Blood Angels, Blood Drinkers, and Flesh Tearers. 

 

Edit: Some of these follow the Codex Astartes as a religion, others fancy it only as a book or guideline. Even amongst the most zealot space marines there are those within their own ranks that follow the above statement, so in turn might favor different aspects of combat.

[Firepower]

 

 We can also look at Dante, who slew a freak'n Avatar

 

But really, who hasn't at this point? ;)

[Omega-soul]

 

 

Ezekyle Abaddon of the Luna Wolves/Sons of Horus

Sigismund of the Imperial Fists

Jago Sevatarion of the Night Lords

Raldoran of the Blood Angels

 

...but that's a peeing contest for a whole other conversation....

 

Still - it's not the case. That story was telling  about the duality (and  therefore versatility) of legion.

Azkaellon was not the best in skills with Lucious - he was  loosing, but he grabed him and jumped from the tower.  Showing that dueling skills alone is not so imortant  in real    combat. And self-sacrifice theme.

In  case of Amit- he also was loosing, but he succumbed to thirst and smashed Khârn.

It was two separate duel.

 

But again - versatility is not being best. It's ability to use particular skills in appropriate situation.

For  example  - If  there is a mighty enemy ahead,  typical world eaters will go fight with them just straight ahead, whereas blood angel can just simply shoot it (or criple somehow) he will use that chance to take battle in his favor  from the begining. But if he had to - he will go smash faces. Where ultramarine for example would just wait an assault  squad.

 

So it's just reasonable way of  fighting without reckless moves (exept Black rage cases)

 

Rules-wise modern  Spacewolfs  are much more potent close combat fighters - all  skills,   stats,  artefacts are DEDICATED for close combat,  and  they  are good in all kinds  of close combat - in offence or defence. They  as good  for taking damage as good for dealing it.

Blood angels are not good for withstanding damage and this is quite imortant thing for an exellent close combatant.

 

And if you compare it with BA artefacts/traits/psychics - we are combination of  mobility, tactical/reserve flexibility and melee.

So this makes blood angels much versatile than typical space wolf.

But not the best in close  combat.

Sad but true.

[Firepower]

Omega-soul, on 20 Jan 2016 - 12:12 PM, said:

 

Rules-wise modern  Spacewolfs  are much more potent close combat fighters - all  skills,   stats,  artefacts are DEDICATED for close combat,  and  they  are good in all kinds  of close combat - in offence or defence. They  as good  for taking damage as good for dealing it.

 

Wolves were made OP the second True Grit became Ultra Grit.  They were mostly a defensive gunline sort of specialty to begin with thanks to that special rule, along with things like superior Devastator equivalents, counter attack, and the Leman Russ tank.  Now they can do everything better than anyone, because Wolves.  

 

BA were cast as the premiere CC Space Marine lineage early in the history of 40k fluff (from the moment they got their first dex, actually).  Their rules and units are aimed towards being the CC army (i.e. just about every exclusive unit they have is geared to fight in CC) but fall short when stacked against other dexes thanks to creep, or the heavy handedness of the Wolf's special rules.

 

But the "OMG Wolves OP why you hates us GW?!" argument is a dead horse and a half.

[Sabadin]

 

 

Don't forget as the fluff currently sits, until it likely gets retconned later, At the battle of Terra daemon Angron went all "NOPE!! I'm fighting somewhere else" just from making eye contact with an angry Sanguinious. That's quite a legacy of combat prowess to be passing down the genetic line.

Do you have the source of that anecdote? I have heard it as well but I am trying to track down the specific origins of all this stuff.

Here's part of it

There was a clamour on the walls as Sanguinius and the Blood Angels arrived. Standing on the wall, the angel-winged Primarch glared on Angron with angry contempt. For long moments their gazes locked, each Primarch seemed to be measuring the other, searching for chinks in the armour, for any sign of weakness and lack of resolve. Who knows what they saw there? Perhaps they communicated telepathically, brother Primarch to brother Primarch. The truth will never be known. Eventually Angron turned and walked back to his lines. He told his troops that there would be no surrender; they should kill everyone they found within the palace. No stone should be left upon stone.

 

It's old Bill King fluff.Back then Angron wasn't ascended yet for the siege though. So it will likely be removed when we hit that point, around when my toddler is old enough to have kids.

[Xenith]

 

 

It's old Bill King fluff.Back then Angron wasn't ascended yet for the siege though. So it will likely be removed when we hit that point, around when my toddler is old enough to have kids.

 

 

Not that it matters, a rage-mode guilliman held his own against Lorgar and Daemon Angron, if I remember correctly.

 

None would be able to stand before an Angry Sanguinius, when his true power came to the fore.

 

True, Horus destroyed him, but a fresh Horus, versus a Sanguinius that was tired from snapping greater daemon spines all day. 

 

The Red Thirst makes the BA want to get up close and personal, they savour the spray of blood on their faces. As has been said, this lifetime ofpractive (longer than other marines) makes them better.

[Arkangilos]

 

 

 

 

It's old Bill King fluff.Back then Angron wasn't ascended yet for the siege though. So it will likely be removed when we hit that point, around when my toddler is old enough to have kids.

 

Not that it matters, a rage-mode guilliman held his own against Lorgar and Daemon Angron, if I remember correctly.

 

None would be able to stand before an Angry Sanguinius, when his true power came to the fore.

 

True, Horus destroyed him, but a fresh Horus, versus a Sanguinius that was tired from snapping greater daemon spines all day.

 

The Red Thirst makes the BA want to get up close and personal, they savour the spray of blood on their faces. As has been said, this lifetime ofpractive (longer than other marines) makes them better.

Not to mention all four chaos gods were actively present in Horus by that point.

[LutherMax]

The feel I get from Blood Angels style of warfare is fast, hard-hitting, tactical precision - but there is certainly a focus on close combat. Assault marines as troops in 5th Ed suggested this, Dante having CC wargear suggests it, Sanguinary Guard and Death Company suggest it. Red Thirst / Black Rage suggest it.

 

It also suits my personal style perfectly (even though the Blood Angels kinda found me rather than the other way around :D) - when I compare to, for example, a friend of mine who plays Imperial Fists - more defensive, more focused on ranged warfare. He often turtles up and stays back whereas I am always aiming to smash face as quickly as possible because that is where the strength lies in our codex.

 

So I would say we're certainly designed to be CC-focused from a codex point of view. Do other codices do it better? Possibly, I've actually never played Wolves but reading the above comments they sound like contenders.

 

From a fluff point of view the 3rd Ed codex quotes above seem to prove your point Indy, and weren't there similar statements in the 5th Ed one if not the current one?