11th Edition Faction Pack Review: Blood Angels

[Rhavien]

https://www.tabletopbattles.com/40k-11th-edition-faction-pack-review-blood-angels

 

No points around yet, but what do you say? I like the sanguinary guard one. We already saw the DC themed one which still doesn't look better because of the MW you have to take in order to trigger the detachment rule.

 

What a coincidence that I finally picked up the brush again yesterday evening and started to get some paint on my new SG.

Edited June 8 by Rhavien

[Karhedron]

The Sanguinary Guard one is OK. I think the DC one requires too many MWs to activate. The general one is like a weak-sauce Angelic Inheritors. The real question is how many DPs LAG is in 11th edition and whether RCO survives. If LAG is 2DPs then I can see these getting some use. If it is 3DPs then not so much. If RCO survives then I don't see a huge amount of point to the DC bolt-on.

[Karhedron]

OK, the DP cost has ben answered and there is good news and bad news.

 

https://www.warhammer-community.com/en-gb/articles/2ekfivpk/new40k-download-new-space-marine-faction-packs-today/

 

The good news is that AI and RCO both survive into 11th edition alongside LAG (as downloadable detachments, I was not sure if they would). The bad news is that all three are costed at 3DPs which means that the bolt-on Detachments are largely irrelevant. We will continue to take LAG, AI or RCO. I still don't see anyone taking Angelic Host or Lost Brethren, even with the ability to bolt something extra on the side.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

Firestorm+encarmine spear tip seems nice.

likewise if I end up buying another storm speeder and the new land speeder, I would be willing to try out encarmine+legacy+fulguris.

 

edit

in legacy of grace, the psychic enhancement says <anti-nonmonster/vehicle5+> is anti-infantry key word gone?

Are there many non-monster or vehicle units that are T8+ to make this useful?

Edited June 9 by Inquisitor_Lensoven

[nelolala]

Sanguinary Priest moved to support. Librarians remained leaders. Expensive but I think there's something there.
Add them both to Assault Intercessors in lib conclave for 20 t4 wounds behind 3+/4++/5+++. Take the discipline for -1s to shooting attacks for benefit vs most anti infantry profiles. 
That's a big tough brick for 290pts . With a lot of ap2 attacks, sporting rerolls to wound. 
 

Not a bad option for a 1 point detachment.

[Karhedron]

10 hours ago, Inquisitor_Lensoven said:

in legacy of grace, the psychic enhancement says <anti-nonmonster/vehicle5+> is anti-infantry key word gone?

Are there many non-monster or vehicle units that are T8+ to make this useful?

 

There are also Swarms and Mounted. Having Anti-X 5+ is still good when you consider that the more powerful version of Smite has Devastating Wounds. This means it will be causing MWs twice as often which is really handy against stuff with good saves.

[Karhedron]

7 hours ago, nelolala said:

Sanguinary Priest moved to support.

 

This is slightly annoying as my standard combo for leading my BGVs is Priest + Lieutenant. The combo of Lethal Hits to help BGVs punch up into tougher targets and Fall Back + Charge to keep Red Thirst active was pretty good. This will have to change as the Lt is also Support and you can have 1 Support + 1 Leader but not 2 Supports.

 

Perhaps a Chaplain instead would work well as +1 to Wound would help against tough targets too and the Spiritual Leader ability to cancel Battleshock is going to be more valuable in 11th. It means we can afford to double-dip on Savage Echoes or Red Rampage at least once without the risk of remaining Battleshocked.

 

Edited June 9 by Karhedron

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

3 hours ago, Karhedron said:

 

There are also Swarms and Mounted. Having Anti-X 5+ is still good when you consider that the more powerful version of Smite has Devastating Wounds. This means it will be causing MWs twice as often which is really handy against stuff with good saves.

I guess but at S6 and AP-2 it’s already going to be doing pretty well into tougher non-monster/vehicle units.

 

Mounted MEQs getting wounded on 3s and saving on 5s with the OC’d version of witchfire. Dev wounds would be nice, but if this enhancement is more than 5 points seems like it would be questionable how helpful it actually will be.

 

best use seems to be specifically hunting characters and elites with decent invulns, but that still feels like a fairly niche use if it’s a 15 or 20 point enhancement. At 10 I guess it could be worth it for that niche.

Edited June 9 by Inquisitor_Lensoven

[Karhedron]

MWs will be very good into Terminators, Custodians, Mega Nobz, Wraithguard etc.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

1 hour ago, Karhedron said:

MWs will be very good into Terminators, Custodians, Mega Nobz, Wraithguard etc.

All generally fairly niche as I said, but will be over priced if it’s more than 10pts imho

 

 

 

[Karhedron]

Just seen the Force dispositions which I had missed before.

 

LAG being Take and Hold is just bonkers. An army that wants to be charging every turn and also has a special rule allowing itself to become Battleshocked does not want to be babysitting Objectives. Not only is Take and Hold one of the weaker Dispositions, it is also particularly weak into Purge armies. I can only think that GW identified RCO as being the most purgey of our Detachments and didn't want to double dip.

 

I am thinking that RCO might be best for our classic lists now with a big block of BGVs + Priest + Chaplain to take the centre. Priority Assets is also a pretty decent Disposition so Angelic Inheritors may have some good mileage.

[DemonGSides]

12 minutes ago, Karhedron said:

Just seen the Force dispositions which I had missed before.

 

LAG being Take and Hold is just bonkers. An army that wants to be charging every turn and also has a special rule allowing itself to become Battleshocked does not want to be babysitting Objectives. Not only is Take and Hold one of the weaker Dispositions, it is also particularly weak into Purge armies. I can only think that GW identified RCO as being the most purgey of our Detachments and didn't want to double dip.

 

I am thinking that RCO might be best for our classic lists now with a big block of BGVs + Priest + Chaplain to take the centre. Priority Assets is also a pretty decent Disposition so Angelic Inheritors may have some good mileage.

 

They just added them for the SM today so nothing was missed.

 

Very weird that LAG is T&H.  Purge was a no brainer imo as well.

It's one of the things that they can look at and change over time though, so hopefully will be rectified by the time I end up playing any 11th.

[Blindhamster]

mechanically purge might have made sense, but the theme of Liberator Assault Group (just think about its name) is about liberating - so take and hold is thematically sound IMO, its just another reason (along with the battleshock) that it should be 2dp

[Karhedron]

I really think LAG should be Reconnaissance. It fits with the BA's fast moving nature and also BAs don't actually have a Reconnaissance Detachment which seems like a strange oversight.

 

Anyone else who agrees, please email 40KFAQ@gwplc.com and ask GW (politely) to change the Disposition before 11th officially launches.

 

Take and Hold is a really bad fit for LAG. T&H requires units to sit tight on Objectives whereas LAG requires you to keep moving and Charging to activate the bonuses. Also, several of the Stratagems require a unit to become Battleshocked to unlock their full power. Again, OC- is not something you want on units that are required to control Objectives.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

8 hours ago, Karhedron said:

Just seen the Force dispositions which I had missed before.

 

LAG being Take and Hold is just bonkers. An army that wants to be charging every turn and also has a special rule allowing itself to become Battleshocked does not want to be babysitting Objectives. Not only is Take and Hold one of the weaker Dispositions, it is also particularly weak into Purge armies. I can only think that GW identified RCO as being the most purgey of our Detachments and didn't want to double dip.

 

I am thinking that RCO might be best for our classic lists now with a big block of BGVs + Priest + Chaplain to take the centre. Priority Assets is also a pretty decent Disposition so Angelic Inheritors may have some good mileage.

Might be a method of balancing the detachment overall?

 

4 hours ago, Karhedron said:

I really think LAG should be Reconnaissance. It fits with the BA's fast moving nature and also BAs don't actually have a Reconnaissance Detachment which seems like a strange oversight.

 

Anyone else who agrees, please email 40KFAQ@gwplc.com and ask GW (politely) to change the Disposition before 11th officially launches.

 

Take and Hold is a really bad fit for LAG. T&H requires units to sit tight on Objectives whereas LAG requires you to keep moving and Charging to activate the bonuses. Also, several of the Stratagems require a unit to become Battleshocked to unlock their full power. Again, OC- is not something you want on units that are required to control Objectives.

Obviously all chapters have recon capabilities, but they’re not known for their recon in the sneaky sense. BA recon is more envisioned as ‘recon in force’ to most people/in the flanderized version of the factions they’ve generally become.

 

i haven’t looked at any of the other chapters with supplements, so do all the others have their own recon detachments?

 

4 hours ago, Karhedron said:

I really think LAG should be Reconnaissance. It fits with the BA's fast moving nature and also BAs don't actually have a Reconnaissance Detachment which seems like a strange oversight.

 

Anyone else who agrees, please email 40KFAQ@gwplc.com and ask GW (politely) to change the Disposition before 11th officially launches.

 

Take and Hold is a really bad fit for LAG. T&H requires units to sit tight on Objectives whereas LAG requires you to keep moving and Charging to activate the bonuses. Also, several of the Stratagems require a unit to become Battleshocked to unlock their full power. Again, OC- is not something you want on units that are required to control Objectives.

Maybe their theory on how they expect you to play is to charge your enemy on the objectives, ya know to liberate them 

[Blindhamster]

i think that is the idea yeah.

 

it definitely isn’t one that plays into the detachment strengths at all, in fact I’d argue the detachment actively works against it. Take and hold is rated one of the worst dispositions by goon hammer as well (though tabletop tactics think the ork detachment that uses it is good - because you have the numbers to make it work)

 

LAG absolutely shouldn’t be a 3DP detachment with that disposition as you simply can’t play to the detachment strengths and also play to the disposition victory conditions

Edited June 10 by Blindhamster

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

16 hours ago, Blindhamster said:

i think that is the idea yeah.

 

it definitely isn’t one that plays into the detachment strengths at all, in fact I’d argue the detachment actively works against it. Take and hold is rated one of the worst dispositions by goon hammer as well (though tabletop tactics think the ork detachment that uses it is good - because you have the numbers to make it work)

 

LAG absolutely shouldn’t be a 3DP detachment with that disposition as you simply can’t play to the detachment strengths and also play to the disposition victory conditions

I don’t keep up with competitive stats, but what I’ve gleaned is that LAG has been VERY strong if dominant might be too much to describe it, but as I said 3DP and a disposition that generally doesn’t suit its play style being used as a way to mitigate how strong it’s been.

not too mention with this edition seeming to be heavily skewed towards melee armies it’s likely to be even stronger.

[Blindhamster]

7 hours ago, Inquisitor_Lensoven said:

I don’t keep up with competitive stats, but what I’ve gleaned is that LAG has been VERY strong if dominant might be too much to describe it, but as I said 3DP and a disposition that generally doesn’t suit its play style being used as a way to mitigate how strong it’s been.

not too mention with this edition seeming to be heavily skewed towards melee armies it’s likely to be even stronger.

berzerker warband has the same detachment bonus and has the purge the foe disposition. 

 

anyway, id argue either 3dp or the disposition would be reasonable balancers against it, but not both. As stated:

- take and hold wants you to sit on objectives and realistically only 2 of them most turns, central one if you can.

- LAG wants you to be entering melee as often as possible (basically ALL of its strats and actual rule are specifically for getting into melee AS THE AGGRESSOR)

- take & hold needs you to maintain good OC to hold the objectives

- LAG wants you to go battleshocked at times to amp up your melee

 

They just aren't a very good fit mechanically, and Take & hold seems to be at best an even matchup with the other dispositions and actually comes out much worse against purge the foe and disruption. 

 

I predict when the edition gets going properly we'll see either:

- blood angels are a very early codex and its all moot as they get a bigger shakeup in terms of detachments and army rules anyway.

- LAG suddenly performs terribly or just straight up isn't used in competitive stats.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

7 hours ago, Blindhamster said:

berzerker warband has the same detachment bonus and has the purge the foe disposition. 

 

anyway, id argue either 3dp or the disposition would be reasonable balancers against it, but not both. As stated:

- take and hold wants you to sit on objectives and realistically only 2 of them most turns, central one if you can.

- LAG wants you to be entering melee as often as possible (basically ALL of its strats and actual rule are specifically for getting into melee AS THE AGGRESSOR)

- take & hold needs you to maintain good OC to hold the objectives

- LAG wants you to go battleshocked at times to amp up your melee

 

They just aren't a very good fit mechanically, and Take & hold seems to be at best an even matchup with the other dispositions and actually comes out much worse against purge the foe and disruption. 

 

I predict when the edition gets going properly we'll see either:

- blood angels are a very early codex and its all moot as they get a bigger shakeup in terms of detachments and army rules anyway.

- LAG suddenly performs terribly or just straight up isn't used in competitive stats.

Might have the same rule, but doesn’t have the same units available to benefit from that rule.

 

how has the bezerker detachment done competitively?

[Jolemai]

https://www.warhammer-community.com/en-gb/articles/dv1aslrr/new40k-new-app-for-a-new-edition/

 

Points to go with these now available.

[Karhedron]

Lieutenants have come down in price to 45 points and it looks like they can be either Leader or Support. This is great and gives them a lot of flexibility. BGVs with Sang priest and Lieutenant is back on the menu! 

 

Apothecaries and Ancients are cheap as chips too. I can see Angelic Inheritors looking good with these changes as we have plenty of sub-50 point Characters who can be dropped into almost any squad.

Edited June 17 by Karhedron

[Xenith]

Anyone noticed that Assault intercessors (inc Jump) are more expensive if you have the BLOOD ANGELS keyword, and are cheaper if you arent? Hopefully a typo, but that's broke as hell. 

The only fun thing I can see is with cheap apocs and librarians, running the libby conclave. All BA units getting +2" move is amazing, and bringing a model back per turn is great with bladeguard - putting the replaced model 2" in front of the unit nets you almost 6 bonus inches of movement. 

[Karhedron]

2 hours ago, Xenith said:

Anyone noticed that Assault intercessors (inc Jump) are more expensive if you have the BLOOD ANGELS keyword, and are cheaper if you arent? Hopefully a typo, but that's broke as hell.

 

I missed that but you are right! Either its a typo or an indication that we may get Red Thirst as our faction ability somewhere down the line.

[Xenith]

I'm thinking typo, as it goes against everything they have said about army design for 10/11th ed. 

[Blindhamster]

there are a number of points differences, not just this.

Repulsor executioner is cheaper for us than for codex marines, and more expensive for templars than codex marines

 

we pay more for assault intercessors and jump intercessors

 

there's a few others too. I couldn't be bothered to try and work them all out and they dont expose the api data for the page to let me check that way lol.