Librarium Online Forums banner
1 - 11 of 11 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
237 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
what's everyone's view on this? as of right now the only thing that the blood angels need, and not even really need, is the updates to the wargear. I find them to be very competitive as of right now. And I love playing them as they are. So personally I don't really think they need an update to the codex, but maybe that's just me...I would love some heraldry so the new models I think is a good idea, but there are different codexs that need updates first.

Just some thoughts from a Blood Angel player.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
322 Posts
I'm not too surprised that they're being updated. The "first four" marine chapters were the Ultramarines (They are covered by the Space Marine codex), the Space Wolves, Dark Angels, and Blood Angels. All of them but Blood Angels don't have an official codex (White Dwarf doesn't count), so it was only a matter of time that they updated the Blood Angels. Last night I was looking at those 3 codexes and the White Dwarf to see which one best suits the Blood Angel army, since Blood Angels are my favourite Marine army I wanted to look at the other codexes and see which one would give me the best options.
I woke up this morning and saw that they're being released in April and nearly wet myself in excitement. I can't wait until they're released and will probably fall to the new-army syndrome, where you collect an army when it comes out.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
144 Posts
I'm a Tau player but I wanted to build a second army to compliment that shooty Xenos army, and for a while I've been scheming to build a Blood Angels army - they're very assaulty and I love the red. But I got the email from GW and that pretty much cemented my decision to build one this year.

I'm not too surprised though because of one reason mainly... When GW remade Space Hulk they put a lot of effort into making the BA and Tyranid models very nice, which means they probably did a lot of concept work for it. So in the planning stages I'm sure they were like, "Well, why dont we kill two birds with one stone and release Space Hulk and then army/codex updates with the Blood Angels and Tyranids shortly thereafter...." Makes sense from a long term production pipeline point of view...

That being said, there are many other armies in greater need of an update, but these two updates seemed like quick "get them out of the way right now while we're working on them" type of things.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,800 Posts
As a Night Lord player I have found that Assault Marines (and Raptors) are very far behind the power curve in 5th Edition. Jump infantry can't handle difficult terrain, can't hide behind most terrain pieces or vehicles, rarely survive alpha strikes from Drop Pod/deepstriking enemies (half the reason I take Rhinos is so the battle cannons and Sternguard can't kill my squads in one volley) and, in the White Dwarf Codex, can't take special weapons and still be scoring. In addition to that, jump infantry face competition from friendly units that outflank, run and/or are cheap transports. In my area, I haven't seen any jump infantry be played for months, unless I got mine out of the cupboard for nostalgia's sake.

It isn't "Blood Angels" that need an update so much as "rules for Assault Marine squads". The upcoming BA 'dex is an excellent opportunity for GW to bring back a neglected unit type. If GW does a good job then I'll convert my Night Lords over; otherwise, I'll just take the jump packs off my Raptors and make Berzerkers out of them.


To Games Workshop: Here a a few ideas to make Assault Marines more effective:

1. Let them use area terrain with less penalty. Double dangerous terrain tests are as bad as standing in the open.

2. Let them assault out of deepstrike. It isn't as broken as it sounds; a 6" charge range combined with the risks of close-proximity deepstriking make it something most players want but won't base their entire army around.

3. Assault Marines need their special weapons. Plasma pistols are too expensive to count.

4. Assault Marines need a defense. Deployment considerations, Night fight rules, scrambled enemy deepstrike, hit & run, or immune to shooting unless at least half the squad is not behind a terrain feature from the attacker's perspective...something, anything other than 'Planet Bowling Ball with a 4+ cover save". Remember that a jump infantry-based army can't do much for two full turns of advancing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ==Me==

·
Senior Member
Joined
·
991 Posts
I look forward with great anticipation to the new BA release. I have been playing my BA for about 2 years now, off-and-on, and I love the way they play currently. I focus mostly on jump packs,I keep some devastators in the back, and I rush everything else headlong to the enemy, and I win a LOT. I've had several players comment in dismay about how much they underestimate the striking distance, and overall mobility, of jump-pack marines.

I would love to see jump pack marines be made more survivable. I agree that jumping in and out of terrain is brutal. Not worth it at all except in the most dire of circumstances. Some better weapon options would also be nice!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,349 Posts
I would love to see jump pack marines be made more survivable. I agree that jumping in and out of terrain is brutal. Not worth it at all except in the most dire of circumstances. Some better weapon options would also be nice!
As it is, you have the option of walking Jump Infantry 6" instead of jumping them 12", thus negating at least one difficult terrain test (I'm 90% sure anyways, but my rulebook is being borrowed atm so I can't confirm whether my memory is serving me right.) Otherwise, you can jump next to terrain, and run inside of it. Running is also unaffected by DT. I suspect that this is the best way to keep it, as mobility is generally at a slight cost to survivability.. and for good reason. Unkillable (rather, more-difficult-to-kill) could very easily be abused, while the rules as is forces commanders to make important decisions.

I think a general reduction to the cost of the unit* would be a more viable fix, allowing BA commanders a slight increase in the feasibility of jumping infantry into or out of terrain.
*My solution, which I hope to see implemented- Remove the mandatory DC "tax", reduce the cost of Assault Marines to that of Vanilla, and add a +10 point bump to the first five purchased in a unit to compensate for their being troops.
 

·
Member
Joined
·
650 Posts
As it is, you have the option of walking Jump Infantry 6" instead of jumping them 12", thus negating at least one difficult terrain test (I'm 90% sure anyways, but my rulebook is being borrowed atm so I can't confirm whether my memory is serving me right.) Otherwise, you can jump next to terrain, and run inside of it. Running is also unaffected by DT. I suspect that this is the best way to keep it, as mobility is generally at a slight cost to survivability.. and for good reason. Unkillable (rather, more-difficult-to-kill) could very easily be abused, while the rules as is forces commanders to make important decisions.

I think a general reduction to the cost of the unit* would be a more viable fix, allowing BA commanders a slight increase in the feasibility of jumping infantry into or out of terrain.
*My solution, which I hope to see implemented- Remove the mandatory DC "tax", reduce the cost of Assault Marines to that of Vanilla, and add a +10 point bump to the first five purchased in a unit to compensate for their being troops.
Difficult/Dangerous terrain is done when jumping in or out of terrain. If you roll the difficult terrain 2d6 (take highest) and use that no dangerous checks. Most like DC will be just another elite/FA unit and no longer a tax. I would not support a +10 point just because they are troops. They are supposed to be the army standard so 16 point per is reasonable. If they come stock with furious charge then a slight increase is warranted unless you offset it with the Rage USR.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,800 Posts
you have the option of walking Jump Infantry 6" instead of jumping them 12"
Which defeats the whole point of using jump marines...and it doesn't address the takeoff test.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,349 Posts
Which defeats the whole point of using jump marines...and it doesn't address the takeoff test.
Nay. By the very inclusion of these rules, I say nay.

Jump Packs are fast and difficult to pilot in close quarters, it makes complete sense to impose penalties when using them in terrain. BA's skill and proficiency with these devices is adequately explained by including Assault Marines as Troops. As otherwise, Assault Marines who wish to move through confined spaces will either face difficulties (possibly suffering casualties by consequence) or do the sensible thing and walk.

On the other hand, re-rolling failed Dangerous Terrain tests would be a suitable veteran skill for Veteran Assault Marines, and the implications would allow them to be compete with Vanguard. On that note, any DT tests, as their finely honed reflexes and skill with jump packs allows them to evade such dangers.

Otherwise, it's simply too much for regular Assault Marines to gain the benefits of both maneuverability and cover.
 

·
Son of LO
Joined
·
3,930 Posts
On the other hand, re-rolling failed Dangerous Terrain tests would be a suitable veteran skill for Veteran Assault Marines, and the implications would allow them to be compete with Vanguard.
It's not hard to compete with Vanguard. You just have to not be totally awful.

Otherwise, it's simply too much for regular Assault Marines to gain the benefits of both maneuverability and cover.
Totally agree. It's actually a better idea for Veterans because they cost more per model and stand to lose more from both dangerous terrain tests and enemy shooting, so a re-roll gives them much-needed survivability, safeguarding your points investment. By contrast, regular Assault Marines are (or will be) nice and cheap, so they really don't need either the cover saves or the DT re-roll.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,349 Posts
It's not hard to compete with Vanguard. You just have to not be totally awful. .
Lol, true that. I meant with regards to veteran skills. BA Veterans would be competitive by comparison with a simple points drop.. but I'd feel cheated if they didn't come with a fancy skill of some sort.
 
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
Top