Lion's Blade vs Gladius? - Wargaming Forum and Wargamer Forums
General 40k This is the place to talk about everything related to Warhammer 40k.

 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #1 of 8 (permalink) Old 09-14-15, 02:10 PM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Xabre's Avatar
Xabre's Flag is: USA
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,848
Reputation: 72
Default Lion's Blade vs Gladius?

This will probably cause a lot of flak, as I've seen it in other DA-centric groups, but I'm very curious.

For the most part, the Lion's Blade and the Gladius are identical FOR MEQ units, especially for the 'OMGFreeTransportHAXORS!' lists that are showing up everywhere.

Now, that's not the case once you actually want to design a creative list, with Deathwing Forces, or Conclaves, etc etc. However, when you consider that most of the Auxillaries are Formations, which means Battle Brothers all the live long day....

The Lion's Blade can technically run cheaper, because you only need one scout squad as the cheapest Auxiliary.

The Gladius needs three Scout squads for their alternative, however you can drop the Assault Squads in favor of something as simple as a single attack bike.

(Edit // Did the math: There's about 70 points in favor of Lion's Blade to run the bare-bones Demi Company).

However, if all you're doing is running the razorspam lists... is Lion's Blade truly the best choice? The 100 points? I feel like the Gladius is far better, with tactical doctrines being more flexible than the Overwatch bonus, not to mention ALSO getting an additional chapter tactic to go with it.

I'm curious other people's opinions. The DA players will just immediately say 'it doesn't matter if it's worse, I play Dark Angels, damnit!' And since I play Thousand Sons, I totally understand using a mediocre rules set. But at the same time... there's almost NO difference in the two lists...


Last edited by Xabre; 09-14-15 at 02:15 PM.
Xabre is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 8 (permalink) Old 09-14-15, 03:47 PM
Senior Member
 
ntaw's Avatar
ntaw's Flag is: Canada
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Mississauga, Canada
Posts: 6,323
Reputation: 99
Default

I faced Tactical Doctrines the other day and it made almost no difference whatsoever. Overwatch bonus for me were I to do either of them, but that's pretty much solely because I think it's a more interesting bonus (while it's completely useless against a lot of armies, it would be very handy in my gaming group). I could play 'red successors' and do either as play tests I suppose since I have a ton of models but rules have never been what attract me to an army.

I don't think this:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Xabre View Post
'it doesn't matter if it's worse, I play Dark Angels, damnit!'
only applies to DA players, but rather to everyone who's ever had a favourite army from GW (the company that cares not for your collection, but rather for their collection of unsold kits in the warehouse...like all good companies should really). I'll play BA 'till I die/give up completely on the hobby, whereas there were three prominent BA players on this site who eBay'd their armies the moment the new 'dex hit.

Ultimately (and pulling us back on topic) I feel that people will choose the DA version for DA models more frequently because, and I might be wrong, most people don't like using another Codex to run their army. This is something that you do with a skill and attention to detail that constantly has me dumbfounded in all honesty. It...irks me, as I'm sure you know, to have to play my army from different rule sources to get the 'feel' right. After talking about this at fair length in my gaming group (that consists of ~8 consistent people and ~12 'here and there' folk) the general consensus is the same. It seems a lot of people are really hung up on getting their 'fairness' out of the rulebooks as opposed to out of agreements between people who just want to play an awesome game instead of rotfstomping their opponents all day, 'erry day.

tl;dr the SM version has way swanky rules but I think if I were to do either I'd still........wait for BA to get their own version of the demi-company

Unfortunately Canada got rid of the penny and now my two cents rounds down to zero, so...take it for what you will.

40k Army Projects

Industrial Table WIP
ntaw is offline  
post #3 of 8 (permalink) Old 09-14-15, 04:07 PM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Xabre's Avatar
Xabre's Flag is: USA
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,848
Reputation: 72
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ntaw View Post
This is something that you do with a skill and attention to detail that constantly has me dumbfounded in all honesty.

Thank you? I'm always trying to find options that can make my army a bit more effective than what was already offered. I feel like Necrons can do a far superior job being Rubrics than Thousand sons can, even without access to psykers. And don't get me started on using Loyalist Marines. :p I'll do whatever I can to play an army the way they SHOULD be represented. Now how GW forces them to underperform.

I suppose I can understand the die hard desire to run a single codex to the exclusion of trying to work it out better in other fashions. And I would totally get that *IF* these people were playing it in order to run, say, Deathwing. Ravenwing. Hell, even Centurions. But with the DA codex coming out, I think GW did the worst thing it could ever do:

Repeat the same army twice.

The Demi Company for DA and Vanilla are basically identical. So now the bonuses are the same too, and you KNOW you'll find people running it just for the Double-D (yeah, I said it) razor spam. Why bother? Play DA for what you want. A deviant chapter, NOT running the same boring stuff.

I'd rather see BA not get the demi, so they can have something uniquely suited to their strengths.

Xabre is offline  
 
post #4 of 8 (permalink) Old 09-14-15, 04:21 PM
Senior Member
 
ntaw's Avatar
ntaw's Flag is: Canada
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Mississauga, Canada
Posts: 6,323
Reputation: 99
Default

Totally meant it as a compliment man, it's opened my eyes up to new possibilities

GW definitely put out the same thing twice (which was indeed quite silly to do), and BA actually got the demi-company first in the Shield of Baal books but damn is it stupid and useless. I don't even want to admit they exist. I guess if you had all the assualt marines the 16 FA slot on is OK, and there's some fun to have in the WD Formations that were released if you have three Stormravens, but Formations I think will be a passing craze. There's already wicked restrictions on army building at most tournaments because some combinations are just broken, and the game is getting way too convoluted to follow unless you keep your blinders on and just focus on a couple armies that you play/face regularly. Even in my casual games people are starting to limit the amount of detachments/formations brought to the table because it can be so ridiculous. I get what GW is trying to do, but Formations don't need so many game altering rules to be used. They just need to be different ways of running legal groups of units or models that fit other aspects of the fluff for that army.

With Formations you can cherry pick the best units from every army almost in the exact same way that an Unbound army works, and technically you can play an army of Formations as Unbound and they still get their special rules. What's the difference between an Unbound army and an army comprised entirely of Formations? Special rules.

...and people have problems with Unbound armies

Unfortunately Canada got rid of the penny and now my two cents rounds down to zero, so...take it for what you will.

40k Army Projects

Industrial Table WIP

Last edited by ntaw; 09-14-15 at 04:27 PM.
ntaw is offline  
post #5 of 8 (permalink) Old 09-14-15, 04:34 PM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Xabre's Avatar
Xabre's Flag is: USA
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,848
Reputation: 72
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ntaw View Post
With Formations you can cherry pick the best units from every army almost in the exact same way that an Unbound army works, and technically you can play an army of Formations as Unbound and they still get their special rules. What's the difference between an Unbound army and an army comprised entirely of Formations? Special rules.

...and people have problems with Unbound armies
I'm pretty sure it says that an Unbound army does NOT get command benefits. which are the special rules on most Detachments.

Formations are another story, they don't offer command benefits, just other bonuses.

Xabre is offline  
post #6 of 8 (permalink) Old 09-14-15, 05:53 PM
Senior Member
 
ntaw's Avatar
ntaw's Flag is: Canada
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Mississauga, Canada
Posts: 6,323
Reputation: 99
Default

Yeah, just sweet and recently increasingly potent 'special rules' that could (given the current state of mono-unit Decurion style Formations) easily be an Unbound army based on the user's model collection and taste while still maintaining said 'special rules' since they aren't Command Benefits.

That was a convoluted sentence, but my coffee-addled mind isn't getting it out much better. Either way this is a bit of a digression from the topic at hand.

Were you to us the SM book to field a green-wing DA army, what Chapter Tactics would you use? Imperial Fists seem the most likely to me, but that's because they seem similarly grim and stoic to me. Plus Bolter Drill and Grim Resolve seem kinda like two sides of the same coin.

Unfortunately Canada got rid of the penny and now my two cents rounds down to zero, so...take it for what you will.

40k Army Projects

Industrial Table WIP
ntaw is offline  
post #7 of 8 (permalink) Old 09-14-15, 06:47 PM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Xabre's Avatar
Xabre's Flag is: USA
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,848
Reputation: 72
Default

I'd probably either use Smurfs, or I'd go with Imperial Fists for the Bolter Drill. Considering the old 'Stubborn' feel, you could say that tactical flexibility is the opposite of you want. In that case, Bolter Drill.

Then, because it IS Dark Angels, I'd use Bikes or Attack Bikes in place of Assault Marines, Scout Bikes instead of the Scout requirements. That way at least I get a feel of Ravenwing in my super-formation full of free tanks. Or I'd bite the bullet and find enough points to run, say, 1st Company instead of 10th company. But if we have that much freedom, it's less of an issue.

Xabre is offline  
post #8 of 8 (permalink) Old 09-19-15, 03:40 PM
Rattlehead
 
MidnightSun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: New Sheoth
Posts: 6,741
Reputation: 83
Default

Army-wide Hit and Run, re-roll Run, and Scout with potent Bike bonuses versus Overwatch at full BS with potent Bike bonuses.

Yeah, Gladius is way better for the Battle Company (White Scars, Ultramarines, Iron Hands, probably Imperial Fists given you need two units of Devastators at any rate, probably Salamanders with the Vulkan man; Dark Angels beat Raven Guard because Raven Guard are the new Dark Angels of the Marine world).

Outside of the Battle Company, they're pretty well balanced books (SM has far more flexible and often stronger Chapter Tactics, Grav Centurions, Khan Stormtalons and the Librarius while DA has Black Knights, strong Biker options probably on par with White Scars, and the Ravenwing Support Squadron where they all have Stealth and Shrouded and can Overwatch - no DA players around here), SM probably eking out a little bit ahead but not by an incredible degree.

Creator of Utilitarian Ultramarines Memes - join the XIII on Facebook (no XVII allowed).
MidnightSun is offline  
Reply

  Lower Navigation
Go Back   Wargaming Forum and Wargamer Forums > Warhammer 40K > General 40k

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Wargaming Forum and Wargamer Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome