Close Combat Issues- An Open Letter to GW

[Damon Nightman]

I dont need to blow an open letter out of the water. That will be done when GW ignores teh ravings of a malcontent

Well, you are coming in here acting incredibly superior though, so some actual specifics would be nice.. preferably post the specifics after you have came off of your high horse and without the aggression.

[TheHarrower]

Lol, I care deeply about the effectiveness of BA close combat and even I didnt get past the first paragraph of this letter. I can only imagine what someone in GW who gives less of a will do.

 

The BA codex is already written and printed. Theres a stack of em in a warehouse somewhere. Your opionions on what is 'wrong' (I didnt read it) will change nothing even if GW read this, which they wont.

 

If its any use to you, Ive been using blobs of DC in the current edition and they are super baller, even minus a points heavy HQ buff. With a cheap sang priest they get better. With Dante they are beast. With a librarian they are almost too hard to deal with.

 

BA arent berzerkers. They arent orks. They arent tyranids. If you want them to be then just play those armys.

 

The reaction to your letter on this forum has been super positive but allow me to give some constructive criticism from someone who writes for a living. It's too long. It's boring.

 

No one in GW cares what you think. Even if they get to the part where you outline your fixes (I skimmed them at the end), which they wont, what do you think will happen? Some sort of ephiphany? "this guy has been playing for 20 whole years! We should totally listen to him!" Theyve been playing just as long and theyve manged fine without you until now.

 

I suggest stop being 'that guy' (im guessing you are too far along at this stage, but it's worth a shot) and deal with it, as I have. I've won my last 6 games with BA by adjusting my tactics, and seeing Ba not as some Khorne lite army that has one trick, but as an army with many specialist units that synergise well when you do it right.

 

BA are really fun right now. You should try having some but based on your letter I feel like WH stopped being about fun for you a long time ago.

 

Wow dude, really? You admit to being a bad player, talk down someone that does a lot for the 40K community, don't even bother to read his post, and then try and pass off your own record in your store as evidence that close combat is fine.

 

I actually extended the courtesy of reading your post. Playing in a bubble in one store and having a good personal record isn't an indication of good a book is. Glad you are doing well, but just because you personally have success doesn't mean the army doesn't have issues. If you Google the Blood Angels Codex and the third result is the Codex is bad, maybe all of those people know a bit more than you? I have my doubts about your opinions because from what I'm reading I assume you don't play competitively or have to deal with the normal top tier lists, but I'll read what you have to say and not respond with an attitude.

 

If you want to honestly contribute constructively here, tell us about your lists, what you play against, what works for you, etc. Barging into a room yelling isn't going to make you any friends. It's a close knit community here and we value all feedback as long as it's constructive.

[Panzer]

I've shown your open letter to a few blokes, the reactions were a bit sporadic. Some chalked you off as just another "BA" guy, those guys only know the stereotypical BA player, which unfortunately we have at our club. (I dont associate with those tykes)

 

I'm curious. What's the stereotype for being a BA player? 

[Dont-Be-Haten]

 

 

I've shown your open letter to a few blokes, the reactions were a bit sporadic. Some chalked you off as just another "BA" guy, those guys only know the stereotypical BA player, which unfortunately we have at our club. (I dont associate with those tykes)

 

I'm curious. What's the stereotype for being a BA player?

Unfortunately we've become the chaos players of old in the eyes of many. In some of the other BA boards there is quite a lot of QQ. My local group give me crap about it actually.

 

5th edition saw a rise in BA (that's when I started too, but it wasn't about being the best for me at the time.) I think there has been some over enthusiasm when complaining about our codices and supplements. Some of it is warranted, but not to the extent I've seen outside these hallowed walls.

 

I usually do my best to laugh it off, but it irks me when "fellow" Chapter players only complain and don't look for the silver linings. I have been guilty of loud QQ too, but it's really amongst the frater. I don't usually take my complaining outside this forum. Such as how I initially felt about RG saving Baal instead of 30,000 sons of the Angel etc.

[Arkangilos]

I get a kick out of a fact that, in a time where we have open and verifiable evidence that they are actually listening to complaints, there are some who are vehemently against giving feedback.

 

Like, I mean if you pay attention, you can use the "they aren't even going to read it" because they have shown to us that they are reading it.

[TheHarrower]

 

 

Hoards are already very good, in fact they are probably one of the most difficult things for Blood Angels to deal with currently... so hoards being deadlier, is not a solution for BA.

 

Most of your complaints are based around the 'buff character' mechanic which I also hate. Having played a lot of 8th edition at this point, that is my single greatest annoyance. To make Sanguinary Guard or Death Company actually worth their salt - you need to string along a whole bunch of expensive buff characters - which on a board with more LOS terrain, or just more terrain in general - is real darn difficult when relying on assault.

 

Berserkers were 'fixed' because they are buffed without having to string along several characters and make sure they can all get into base / charge range.

 

Most difficult to deal with? I think we are better equipped to deal with hordes than anyone. Death Company, Frag Cannons, Assault Cannons, Heavy Flamer Devastators, Baal Predators, Storm Ravens, etc. I have issues dealing with a lot of different stuff in 8th Edition. Hordes definitely isn't one of them.

 

I'll agree on Berzerkers being fixed because they don't need auras to be successful, but my point was GW is listening. Look at the FAQ for the Chaos Space Marines Codex they just released. If we respectively provide feedback, odds are, they'll make it right.

 

 

I definitely don't agree on hoards - unless you are talking about list tailoring; which is basically the corner that GW has always jammed us. But even so, with a fully flamer-ed up list, you'll kill some chaff and again on overwatch - but once they assault you it's pretty much over, you can move away and not be able to shoot or get slowly wounded - this is exactly why spammy hoards are doing so well right now, and exactly why small elitish forces have trouble with them - you don't have enough on the table to afford letting your units be tied up all game but you can't really prevent it when they have the cheap numbers.

 

 

Base list I've been running lately has 2 AssCan Razors, Raven with AssCan and Hurricane Bolters, Scouts with Snipers and Missile Launcher, 8 DC with Lemmy, and Devs with 4 Missile Launchers. I don't face max hordes, typically I'm dealing with 3 units of 30 whatever, but I've been able to deal with those fairly well. If I don't totally shoot them off the table before they get to me (rarely), I am able to successfully thin them out enough that I can deal with them in assault. Are you dealing with a lot more?

[TheHarrower]

 

 

I've shown your open letter to a few blokes, the reactions were a bit sporadic. Some chalked you off as just another "BA" guy, those guys only know the stereotypical BA player, which unfortunately we have at our club. (I dont associate with those tykes)

I'm curious. What's the stereotype for being a BA player?

Unfortunately we've become the chaos players of old in the eyes of many. In some of the other BA boards there is quite a lot of QQ. My local group give me crap about it actually.

 

5th edition saw a rise in BA (that's when I started too, but it wasn't about being the best for me at the time.) I think there has been some over enthusiasm when complaining about our codices and supplements. Some of it is warranted, but not to the extent I've seen outside these hallowed walls.

 

I usually do my best to laugh it off, but it irks me when "fellow" Chapter players only complain and don't look for the silver linings. I have been guilty of loud QQ too, but it's really amongst the frater. I don't usually take my complaining outside this forum. Such as how I initially felt about RG saving Baal instead of 30,000 sons of the Angel etc.

 

 

I'm not up on all the cool lingo nowadays. QQ?

 

Outside of here there is a lot of incessant whining. BA definitely have a bad wrap. When FLG was doing the Index review the amount of complaints in the Twitch chat was insane. Same goes for over on Faeit. Makes me kinda embarrassed sometimes to be a BA player. I keep the majority of my complaints to this board since we all "get it". 

[Panzer]

 

 

 

I've shown your open letter to a few blokes, the reactions were a bit sporadic. Some chalked you off as just another "BA" guy, those guys only know the stereotypical BA player, which unfortunately we have at our club. (I dont associate with those tykes)

I'm curious. What's the stereotype for being a BA player?

Unfortunately we've become the chaos players of old in the eyes of many. In some of the other BA boards there is quite a lot of QQ. My local group give me crap about it actually.

 

5th edition saw a rise in BA (that's when I started too, but it wasn't about being the best for me at the time.) I think there has been some over enthusiasm when complaining about our codices and supplements. Some of it is warranted, but not to the extent I've seen outside these hallowed walls.

 

I usually do my best to laugh it off, but it irks me when "fellow" Chapter players only complain and don't look for the silver linings. I have been guilty of loud QQ too, but it's really amongst the frater. I don't usually take my complaining outside this forum. Such as how I initially felt about RG saving Baal instead of 30,000 sons of the Angel etc.

 

 

I'm not up on all the cool lingo nowadays. QQ?

 

Outside of here there is a lot of incessant whining. BA definitely have a bad wrap. When FLG was doing the Index review the amount of complaints in the Twitch chat was insane. Same goes for over on Faeit. Makes me kinda embarrassed sometimes to be a BA player. I keep the majority of my complaints to this board since we all "get it". 

 

QQ is a smiley. Means crying/whining/whatever. Similar to T_T but QQ is often used in everyday speech in certain subcultures since it's easy and quick to say. 

[Chaplain Gunzhard]

Base list I've been running lately has 2 AssCan Razors, Raven with AssCan and Hurricane Bolters, Scouts with Snipers and Missile Launcher, 8 DC with Lemmy, and Devs with 4 Missile Launchers. I don't face max hordes, typically I'm dealing with 3 units of 30 whatever, but I've been able to deal with those fairly well. If I don't totally shoot them off the table before they get to me (rarely), I am able to successfully thin them out enough that I can deal with them in assault. Are you dealing with a lot more?

 

 

Oh man I face Chaos spam on the reg... tons of cheap bodies with invuls that don't give a damn about AP. I mean, chances are you're a much better player than me, but I think my Chaos opponent would destroy your list, at least if I were using it haha. You have so few units. The Stormraven is a beast of course, but once they tie up your other 4 units they're neutralized. At least in previous editions your vehicles didn't stay locked in combat, now you can move out sure, but then you can't shoot. Tons of cheap Smite, for chaos at least, has been able to kill my Stormraven in the first turn on several occasions.

 

So now I have to keep my Stormraven on the fringes, which basically means my dreadnought is not getting where he needs to be... all of this might be ok if I didn't have so few units to deal with threats and take/hold objectives.

 

Do you not play objective missions?

[TheHarrower]

 

Base list I've been running lately has 2 AssCan Razors, Raven with AssCan and Hurricane Bolters, Scouts with Snipers and Missile Launcher, 8 DC with Lemmy, and Devs with 4 Missile Launchers. I don't face max hordes, typically I'm dealing with 3 units of 30 whatever, but I've been able to deal with those fairly well. If I don't totally shoot them off the table before they get to me (rarely), I am able to successfully thin them out enough that I can deal with them in assault. Are you dealing with a lot more?

 

 

Oh man I face Chaos spam on the reg... tons of cheap bodies with invuls that don't give a damn about AP. I mean, chances are you're a much better player than me, but I think my Chaos opponent would destroy your list, at least if I were using it haha. You have so few units. The Stormraven is a beast of course, but once they tie up your other 4 units they're neutralized. At least in previous editions your vehicles didn't stay locked in combat, now you can move out sure, but then you can't shoot. Tons of cheap Smite, for chaos at least, has been able to kill my Stormraven in the first turn on several occasions.

 

So now I have to keep my Stormraven on the fringes, which basically means my dreadnought is not getting where he needs to be... all of this might be ok if I didn't have so few units to deal with threats and take/hold objectives.

 

Do you not play objective missions?

 

 

I don't want to threadjack. I'll respond over in the BA vs hordes thread here: http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/topic/338372-ba-versus-hordes/

[Poppaby]

I'm just having fun with them. I deploy to minimize people DSing in decent range of me, I have a DC blob freaking everyone out. I spend a turn getting SG into position to attack while keeping them safe. I have Dante be near shooty units to give them rerolls, and a libby that can DS to smite a Warlord or buff a unit. I have a repemptor mincing infantry.

 

Its all good. And fun, which is the main thing. Theres so much to enjoy, so many ways to play BA right now.

I might write an open letter to GW to thank them for making my army useful. You think theyd read it?

[Damon Nightman]

It's great that you have fun and do well in your very casual setting, but I think Mort and others here are more talking about the competitive/tournament scene where you fight nothing but spam and cheese lists.

 

I don't think anyone here is saying you can't play BA in 8th casually and have fun.

 

Also, you do realize GW asks for community feedback now right?

[Arkangilos]

Proof that they listen to feedback now: in the codex cult units were not troops for their respective legions. There was feedback, and now they have released an errata allowIng the WE and EC to take their respective cult units as troops.

 

There's more proof, but that's the most recent.

[Poppaby]

You think theyll drastically alter the assault mechanics because some guy doesnt kill enough with his space marines? Re the chaos troops thing - that was a mistake in teh codex that GW needed to fix. That would have been amended no matter who wrote open letters about it. Thats why its an errata - because it was an error. Thats proof of nothing other than GW arent proofing their own codexes, which the volume of erratas for everything else was already proving.

 

As for competative lists in tournaments and the problems with spam - changing teh assault phase isnt going to improve that scene. Tournaments have always been about winning at all costs. If you want to win tournaments then you need to be willing to sacrifice the soul of any army to compete. it has always been that way. Once again, an open letter to GW suggesting wholesale changes to the assault mechanic wont fix that, and it certainly wont stop your BA getting roatsed by weight of fire.

 

Theres a comment somewhere in this thread where a guy says how his mate read the open letter and commented on it being 'one of those BA guys'. Its letters like this that has people saying stuff like that. I play BA and even I rolled my eyes reading the letter. Its pathetic. And if you post it on here looking for suggestions then be prepared for a little negativity.

Maybe if we start a petition to make BA the best army in the game they'll listen....

[Chaplain Gunzhard]

You think theyll drastically alter the assault mechanics because some guy doesnt kill enough with his space marines? Re the chaos troops thing - that was a mistake in teh codex that GW needed to fix. That would have been amended no matter who wrote open letters about it. Thats why its an errata - because it was an error. Thats proof of nothing other than GW arent proofing their own codexes, which the volume of erratas for everything else was already proving.

 

As for competative lists in tournaments and the problems with spam - changing teh assault phase isnt going to improve that scene. Tournaments have always been about winning at all costs. If you want to win tournaments then you need to be willing to sacrifice the soul of any army to compete. it has always been that way. Once again, an open letter to GW suggesting wholesale changes to the assault mechanic wont fix that, and it certainly wont stop your BA getting roatsed by weight of fire.

 

Theres a comment somewhere in this thread where a guy says how his mate read the open letter and commented on it being 'one of those BA guys'. Its letters like this that has people saying stuff like that. I play BA and even I rolled my eyes reading the letter. Its pathetic. And if you post it on here looking for suggestions then be prepared for a little negativity.

Maybe if we start a petition to make BA the best army in the game they'll listen....

 

Let me just say, regarding tournaments - it has absolutely NOT always been that way. I've played every edition of 40k and played in tournaments starting with 2nd edition... to be a "power gamer" back then was pretty frowned upon (even in 3rd edition). It wasn't really until 5th edition hit the scene and large internet audiences started following blogs/groups like BOLS and FLG that we saw that sort of "WAAC" gaming explicitly encouraged, and eventually wholly integrated at events like the LVO.

 

I think also you just don't know what you're talking about. Whatever people think of 'one of those BA guys', it can't be any different than 'one of the Dark Eldar guys', or 'one of those CSM guys'... and frankly who gives a ? ...there's plenty of evidence that they are accepting and responding to feedback.

 

Criticism would be helpful, but you've really contributed nothing.

[Poppaby]

Well fine, as long as everyone else is a moany moron then its ok if BA guys are moany too? Congratulations on contributing less than me.

 

Im sure the tournament scene in 2nd was all high fives and pancakes but its 8th now and teh tournament scene is most certainly not that way. Deal with it.

 

GW are responding to us when we point out glaring errors in the codexes. But again.... my point... do you think they will drastically alter teh game mechanics based on anything that is being said here, least of all the open letter???

 

No - they wont. They certainly wont based in the open letter. Assuming they manage to stay awake reading it, they will simply ignore it.

[Poppaby]

Maybe if we all write open letters:

 

dear Games Workshop

 

Congrats on the new Warhammer 40k. It's ace. There's more people in the shops and teh de-bloated rule set and balancing of armies is actually making it fair for a change.

 

I do however have some problems that I have no doubt you will immediately address based on this letter, because you misspelled Wolf in the  Index and you fixed that jolly quick I must say.

 

1: Blood Angels arent the best. I love them, but the fact that every unit isnt magnus level strong  is a real stone in my sock. I've won some games, but also lost some and it is causing me to lose sleep for all the letters I need to write. I have an idea of how to fix this issue. Basically, give us all the best rules from all the other arnies, and also change the core rules to multiply the effect. All the guys who play blood angels on the 40k forum I belong to agree with me, except this one guy who keeps saying you wont give a toss about this letter. I look forward to proving him wrong

 

Yours sincerely

 

All the Blood Angels guys who are never happy, no matter what

[Chaplain Gunzhard]

Well fine, as long as everyone else is a moany moron then its ok if BA guys are moany too? Congratulations on contributing less than me.

 

Im sure the tournament scene in 2nd was all high fives and pancakes but its 8th now and teh tournament scene is most certainly not that way. Deal with it.

 

GW are responding to us when we point out glaring errors in the codexes. But again.... my point... do you think they will drastically alter teh game mechanics based on anything that is being said here, least of all the open letter???

 

No - they wont. They certainly wont based in the open letter. Assuming they manage to stay awake reading it, they will simply ignore it.

 

I don't think Stormraven spam and currently Conscript spam are "glaring errors"; like many of the fixes / errata they've provided so far, they're based on feedback.

 

Do I personally believe they will read this entire letter and make changes to the core game based on its content? Of course not, nor do I think the OP believes that... but weight of feedback must matter for something, and again - whatever you choose to believe, they ARE responding to feedback now, to varying degrees at least.

[Damon Nightman]

Dude I think you just read small parts of the op and thread and immediately freaked out and jumped to conclusions.

 

Regardless of anything else, GW openly welcomes feedback now. The op didn't say" hey, do you guys think I should send a letter at all or not?" He asked for feedback about the letter and how to improve it. He mentions he's coming from a BA viewpoint and wants other's perspectives. You just came in and pooped on everything and everyone commenting basically without helping at all. You're just coming off as incredibly rude in my opinion.

 

I don't think anything will change from this letter, but why not let GW decide for themselves?

 

Edit: do you want to write an open letter to the BA forum to let us know how dissapointed you are in us for not being happy?

[Arkangilos]

Never mind

[Arkangilos]

Never mind

[Arkangilos]

Nevermind

[Dont-Be-Haten]

I would rather this thread not be closed due to ignorance. Let's move back on track before the reclusiarch or Mort himself drops the x on it.

 

I believe they are monitoring this fairly closely now. So let's try to have a cup of tea and change gears for a moment; Yeah?

 

With respect, I can tell you Mort knows what He's talking about.

[TheHarrower]

You think theyll drastically alter the assault mechanics because some guy doesnt kill enough with his space marines? Re the chaos troops thing - that was a mistake in teh codex that GW needed to fix. That would have been amended no matter who wrote open letters about it. Thats why its an errata - because it was an error. Thats proof of nothing other than GW arent proofing their own codexes, which the volume of erratas for everything else was already proving.

 

No. It wasn't a mistake. They specifically said they are being moved under Elites and you can take a Vanguard Detachment if you want to take a lot of them. So yeah, they are listening to feedback and making changes because those rules were added based on feedback. 

 

Ya know, I don't even know why I'm responding to anything you write on here. Everything you've written is filled with such vitriol. Is there a block or ignore option for users on here? 

[Arkhanist]

 

Is there a block or ignore option for users on here? 

 

 

For an entirely unrelated reason, ahem, I looked for this option myself just now. Click on your username top-left, and Manage Ignore Prefs.