Two Baals in 1850? - Warhammer 40K Fantasy
 

Welcome to Librarium Online!

Join our community of 80,000+ members and take part in the number one resource for Warhammer and Warhammer 40K discussion!

Registering gives you full access to take part in discussions, upload pictures, contact other members and search everything!


Register Now!

User Tag List

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 22
  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    103
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Reputation
    -6 (x0)

    Two Baals in 1850?

    Will opponents cry cheese or fluff?

    Tyranids: 11/3/1
    Chaos: 2/3/0
    Tau: 3/2/0
    Latest Battle: Tau win against DA!

  2. Remove Advertisements
    Librarium-Online.com
    Advertisements
     

  3. #2
    Member Kaluha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    43
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Reputation
    4 (x1)

    I would think by playing BA they will cry cheese but I say go for it.

  4. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    103
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Reputation
    -6 (x0)

    I am trying to build a BA list thats very fluffy.... an having two Baals does exactly that. A LOT of marines players will play with two Preds in 1850, and BA uses Baals as there Preds. It just sucks that because of the AC people go nuts about it
    Tyranids: 11/3/1
    Chaos: 2/3/0
    Tau: 3/2/0
    Latest Battle: Tau win against DA!

  5. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Scotland
    Age
    38
    Posts
    147
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Reputation
    9 (x1)

    Hi there,

    I'm currently putting together a 1000 pt BA force that has a Baal, and I fully intend to include another when I expand it. The way I see it its fluffy to include units that are only available to one type of force. So I say go for it!

  6. #5
    Now with STFU flames! Caluin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Age
    36
    Posts
    5,917
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputation
    708 (x8)

    Quote Originally Posted by ArmyofTerror View Post
    I am trying to build a BA list thats very fluffy.... an having two Baals does exactly that. A LOT of marines players will play with two Preds in 1850, and BA uses Baals as there Preds. It just sucks that because of the AC people go nuts about it
    Just because Baal's are only avaliable to Blood Angels (and Successor Chapters), it doesn't mean that they're the only Predator avaliable to Blood Angels. I think using any one kind of vehicle to the exclusion of all others is unfluffy, even if you claim that it's the Chapter's vehicle of choice.

    Instead of using two Baal's, perhaps you could consider using one Baal and one regular Predator, like a Destructor. When expanding the army to include a third HS slot, then you might consider taking the second Baal. That, in my mind, would be far fluffier than just taking a bunch of Baal's.


  7. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Minneapolis, Minnesota (USA)
    Age
    35
    Posts
    1,252
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputationReputation
    75 (x3)

    I agree with Caluin, except I think that the real fluf problem is when you take all three as the same thing, so three baals is probably no good, but two baals isn't too bad. I normally bring 2 baals in 2000 points and 2 Furiouso dreds; and then I struggle with whether I should bring a normal dred because they are pretty good too, especailly when they have the cover of four vehicles. so reiterating I think the fluff problem happens when you use all three slots for the same thing, but as long as you have the option for something else I think you are in the clear, even if you don't take it.

  8. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    103
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Reputation
    -6 (x0)

    [QUOTE=Caluin;843801]Just because Baal's are only avaliable to Blood Angels (and Successor Chapters), it doesn't mean that they're the only Predator avaliable to Blood Angels. I think using any one kind of vehicle to the exclusion of all others is unfluffy, even if you claim that it's the Chapter's vehicle of choice.QUOTE]

    No, I mean the Baal is special to Blood Angels. I only want to use those, rather than using any other kind of Pred. What I am saying is, is that Blood angels would also use a Baal over another Pred. The Baal has HUGE limitations over an annihalator (3 LC is very nice at anti tank). But because the Baal has the AC's people cry that it is cheesy. AC's are not as insane as people think. Any way, what I am saying is the fluffy part about it is that the BA WOULD use the Baal over the other Preds.
    Tyranids: 11/3/1
    Chaos: 2/3/0
    Tau: 3/2/0
    Latest Battle: Tau win against DA!

  9. #8
    Senior Member Captain America's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    In the thick of the fight! Franklin, TN
    Age
    34
    Posts
    515
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputation
    44 (x2)

    I wouldn't say that they would use it to the exclusion of other preds. They like it, as its an excellent close infantry support tank. And they do love their charging infantry. :rolleyes: Gotta love them BA.

    I would recommend a Baal and a Pred, personally.

    Fluffwise, I don't think they would have two Baals over a Baal and another Pred. My two cents.
    I'm an American, religious, male and a proud Republican. You have your beliefs and (gasp) I have mine. Deal with it!

    Quote Originally Posted by Wikipedia
    To be "owned" in a game or otherwise is to be miserably defeated by an opponent or an opposing team.

  10. #9
    LO Oldie
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    California, USA
    Posts
    1,248
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputation
    34 (x3)

    Well, the way I see it, BA are undeniably cheesy by nature so might as well use Baal's, and if your opponent screams cheese, so be it, but since you're playing BA, you'll be called cheesy anyways so whatever..


    Quote Originally Posted by ArmyofTerror
    The Baal has HUGE limitations over an annihalator (3 LC is very nice at anti tank). But because the Baal has the AC's people cry that it is cheesy
    Not exactly, as your opponent has to leave his tank in front of your 3 lascannon predator in order for you to fire all of em (and whoe gonna do that?)
    2000pts Orks 4-2-1

  11. #10
    Senior Member Captain America's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    In the thick of the fight! Franklin, TN
    Age
    34
    Posts
    515
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputation
    44 (x2)

    :hmm: BA aren't cheesy. There is no such thing as a cheesy list. Guns don't kill people. People kill people. Army lists don't make cheesy armies. Players make cheesy armies.
    I'm an American, religious, male and a proud Republican. You have your beliefs and (gasp) I have mine. Deal with it!

    Quote Originally Posted by Wikipedia
    To be "owned" in a game or otherwise is to be miserably defeated by an opponent or an opposing team.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts