Warhammer 40k Forum and Wargaming Forums banner

1 - 18 of 18 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
24 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
So I am a fan of the blood angels and have the old codex and in it
For every 5 death company guys you can take a death company dreadnought
Lemartes allows more death company troops
Sanguinary allows more sanguinary guards
And ball predAtors are fast attack
Now from what I have heard this all got taken out in the new codex is this true and if so why
They where some of the better aspects of the blood angels stuff
Also as far as space wolves I know in the old codex if you took Logan you. Could have golf guard as troops
Njal. Had all the powers is thus still the case also
 

·
nice boy, daft though !
Joined
·
10,212 Posts

·
So be it.
Joined
·
1,901 Posts
You can now take unlimited DC/DC dreads, just as Elites.
Lemartes never allowed more DC troops, that was Astorath.
Similarly, Dante allowed SG troops, not the Sanuginor. And Dante is a beast now.
Baals are indeed heavy.
Also, RAS are fast attack. Though, since Baals are Heavy I doubt I'll fill up those slots otherwise.

Overall, I think the codex is better. Tactical marines are good, and scouts are good. Our troops are fine. The heavy support section is a bit cramped for 1 CAD, but we have other answers then Baals for anti-medium infantry. We'll be fine with Ravens and Vindis/etc. If you really want it, unbound is still an option, and the army definitely packs more of a punch. Personally, I like it! My current 1850 list is almost the exact same as my previous one, but with more models, more firepower, and more flexibility. I love it :grin:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
24 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
Personally I think its all stupid. They should keep baals as fast attack which is what they are
They should of kept mephiston and dants. Ability for troops as well as Logan grimnars troop ability .. Really saddens me
How are you about to keep your same list if its based around that stuff. Sometimes I don't understand gw..
Like how they released the new 40k rule book and then a month after they released another one really why the first one was perfectly fine..
The codex's don't need to change every edition if you find a version of a codex that is great where its at then keep it tbere
 

·
Rattlehead
Joined
·
6,741 Posts
How are you about to keep your same list if its based around that stuff. Sometimes I don't understand gw..
So you buy a new army. GW wouldn't make a lot of money from existing players if you could run the exact same army edition after edition, and some kits would simply never sell.

Like how they released the new 40k rule book and then a month after they released another one really why the first one was perfectly fine..
What, 6th ed to 7th ed? It was slightly over a year, I think, and 6th was kind of fucking awful. 7th isn't the best, but it's a huge improvement to a game that really needed it.

The codex's don't need to change every edition if you find a version of a codex that is great where its at then keep it tbere
Name some 'great' codexes. 5th ed Marines, 5th ed Dark Eldar and 6th ed Tau are the only ones that I'd consider close to being a 'great' codex, and even then the internal balance has room for improvement to a greater or lesser degree.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,323 Posts
Lemartes allows more death company troops
This was never true, you're thinking of Astorath (who's a lot better in this edition).

They should of kept mephiston and dants.
Mephy got a bit worse for wear but he can join units at least now and Dante is a fucking beast compared to the last edition of the Codex. Note that he swing his Axe at I6 now, not I1.

How are you about to keep your same list if its based around that stuff.
You're kinda preaching to the choir my friend. I got back into BA just as 5th was ending (not that I knew that) and build a Razorback-oriented army.

Then we couldn't assault out of vehicles without the Assault Vehicle USR. Fine.

I then put my time and money into purchasing and building a bunch of Jump infantry during 6th edition because my Tactical marines were for my newly growing Imperial Fist army, heck I'll even repaint my red Rhinos yellow for 'em.

Then we lost Assault marines as Troops. OK. Fine.

Point is, GW doesn't give a fuck about our model collections. They need to, as a business, constantly shake things up to keep us buying new models otherwise they'd be over with because we'd all have perfected our armies years ago. It pissed me off a bit at first, but the new Codex plays well so long as you're not in this game purely to crush people and win every game ever. In that case BA are very much not for you.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,323 Posts
^ Isn't there a Detachment in the Shield of Baal: Exterminatus book that enables this type of list?

I mean, their rules are a little different now, but it would still be pretty fun. Plus I am absolutely loving those cheap Jump Packs!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
580 Posts
^ Isn't there a Detachment in the Shield of Baal: Exterminatus book that enables this type of list?

I mean, their rules are a little different now, but it would still be pretty fun. Plus I am absolutely loving those cheap Jump Packs!
Its quite the book, the only 7th ed book I own a physical copy.

There is a detachment in shield of Baal unfortunately I did not manage to get a copy :( really wanted that one.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,323 Posts
really wanted that one
I've been using this and Battlescribe files that include those Detachments to build stuff. It's pretty much the only way I can play my Necron army with army-specific special rules from a Detachment, my collection and interests in no way line up with the Decurion detachments presented in the new Codex.

Jeeze, another example of GW not caring about collections: no, after buying a $60 Codex I do not want to buy two or three new boxes just to get to use the special rules therein (no matter how awesome Tomb Blades/Wraiths/Spiders are I never thought of them for my foot-slogging 'Cron army).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
580 Posts
I've been using this and Battlescribe files that include those Detachments to build stuff. It's pretty much the only way I can play my Necron army with army-specific special rules from a Detachment, my collection and interests in no way line up with the Decurion detachments presented in the new Codex.

Jeeze, another example of GW not caring about collections: no, after buying a $60 Codex I do not want to buy two or three new boxes just to get to use the special rules therein (no matter how awesome Tomb Blades/Wraiths/Spiders are I never thought of them for my foot-slogging 'Cron army).
Pretty much sums it up.

Just glad they fixed necrons. Back in.... 3rd/4th I could wipe out a necron army in 2 turns. (Genestealers...) all because of the silly ld check after a losing battle.

On the other side of Canada are my Blood Angels, awaiting more DC....



Old and new..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
24 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 ·
Why did they take out logan i mean he is still alive and part of the space wolves ?
Don't understand
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,323 Posts
Why did they take out logan i mean he is still alive and part of the space wolves ?
FOC manipulation is becoming a way of the past, according to the dude that runs the GW a couple towns over.

I rue the day Dark Angels get an update.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
24 Posts
Discussion Starter · #15 ·
Why he is still part of the lore and leader of the space wolves..
I just dont. Understand that
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,689 Posts
Logan is still in the codex. He just takes up a Lord of war slot, as opposed to a standard HQ slot.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
443 Posts
FOC manipulation is becoming a way of the past, according to the dude that runs the GW a couple towns over.

I rue the day Dark Angels get an update.
Hopefully 3 different formations for RW,DW,GW. Similiar to the new Eldar codex the way they can organize into Saim Hann, Iyanden etc?

Anyone else gwtting the impression someone hasnt done there home work before starting this thread?
Isnt that what friends are for?
 
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
Top