PDA

View Full Version : Thoughts about dark angels



Silent Surrender
31-05-2015, 20:33
So GW dont like duplicate choises in codexes. Maybe there wont be any vanilla choise like tactical squads etz. in future DA, BA and SW books?

Lord Damocles
31-05-2015, 20:42
Given that Dark Green Marines, Red Marines, and Grey Marines are 90% re-skins of Vanilla Marines, I think that scenario unlikely.


...besides which, the picture from White Dwarf showing the new Interogator Chaplain also shows a Dark Angel Tactical Squad...

Beppo1234
31-05-2015, 21:16
Ludacris, absolutely ludacris.

why would one think GW would release a power armor shoulder pad set for a chapter, then exclude those units from their codex for the sake of avoiding unit replication? That's an illogical conclusion (even for GW)

GW makes its bread and butter from replicating unit entries. 75% of all marine chapter rules in a marine codex are replicated with some odd changes here and there that don't amount to much thought or effort (tact, assault, devastators, scouts, dreads, speeders etc etc), with the other 25% being novel and unique to that given chapter (in the case of DA, DW, DWK, RW, RWK etc etc). On top of that, even the things that aren't duplicated, often have very little difference from existing units. I happen to feel an additional 20 word paragraph, copy and pasted into an existing profile is not exactly different.

Silent Surrender
31-05-2015, 21:36
Have you guys totaly forgotten about the ally system? And why do you think they release the upgrade sprues with the space marine codex and not alongside the codexes they belong to?

Beppo1234
31-05-2015, 23:14
Have you guys totaly forgotten about the ally system? And why do you think they release the upgrade sprues with the space marine codex and not alongside the codexes they belong to?

because they're not upgrade sprues like old... they're the replacement for the shoulder pad pack with a few mandatory extra bits. These are not replacing the grey hunters box, the dark angel veteran box, or the death company box. You are reading into that too much.

dblaz3r
01-06-2015, 03:39
Why wait for the next BA/SW/DA codex to release an upgrade sprue, who's knows how long the wait for each codex could be until release. Except DA ;):D.

Releasing them alongside ye old generic marine codex is more likely to get a few impulse buys of the new assault and devastator kits from those that might not have bought them otherwise. Well, I know it's worked on me anyway.

Wesser
01-06-2015, 07:27
Well I've stated this before

If the sub-marine codexes are just reskins of Codex Space Marines where 90% is the same bar a few bonus units and special rules then the whole thing should be folded into one codex.


The same guy in my gaming group plays Imperial Fists, Blood Angels and Dark Angels using the same models, and the differences for me as the opponent is really tiny. It's still basically the same stuff doing the same things I'm fighting.


So I hope for GW to come up with something to justify DA as a separate codex rather than something that feels like another supplement.

Spiney Norman
01-06-2015, 07:50
If the sub-marine codexes are just reskins of Codex Space Marines where 90% is the same bar a few bonus units and special rules then the whole thing should be folded into one codex.

The same guy in my gaming group plays Imperial Fists, Blood Angels and Dark Angels using the same models, and the differences for me as the opponent is really tiny. It's still basically the same stuff doing the same things I'm fighting.

So I hope for GW to come up with something to justify DA as a separate codex rather than something that feels like another supplement.

But the difference for people who play those armies is pretty huge, I'd say the six completely unique units DA have access to (as well as the ten+ generic marine units they don't have access to) justify their existence as a variant codex, that's about the same difference as between chaos marines and the daemonkin book after all.

Losing those unique units would be pretty bad from the position of a DA player, and to keep them if DA were folded into a generic codex they'd pretty much have to include an entirely separate DA list alongside the main marine one, the simplest way does seem to be to keep them as a separate book. I'm not sure why you are so hostile to them if you dint even play the armies.

Silent Surrender
01-06-2015, 08:13
It seems noone get what I mean. I mean that future books like dark angels would become like the harlequins book. Everything dark angels specific will be in that book, all generic stuff like tactical marines and devastators you would need the space marine book to ally them in or to use a special formation to get them in your army. Maybe even use a statement that you can take troops from codex space marines like troops in a dark angels army etz.

Geez...

Spiney Norman
01-06-2015, 08:24
It seems noone get what I mean. I mean that future books like dark angels would become like the harlequins book. Everything dark angels specific will be in that book, all generic stuff like tactical marines and devastators you would need the space marine book to ally them in or to use a special formation to get them in your army. Maybe even use a statement that you can take troops from codex space marines like troops in a dark angels army etz.

Geez...

I think I understand what you mean, but I very much doubt it will happen. If allied codex adherent chapters wee the only way to get tactical marines into a DA list why would they still be posting pictures of DA tactical marines? That would be a mind-bendingly clunky way to build an army, I don't really see the current dark Angels codex as being that different to the daemonkin codex, some overlap with SM/CSM, but plenty of units that are unique to it as well.

Wesser
01-06-2015, 08:39
But the difference for people who play those armies is pretty huge, I'd say the six completely unique units DA have access to (as well as the ten+ generic marine units they don't have access to) justify their existence as a variant codex, that's about the same difference as between chaos marines and the daemonkin book after all.

Losing those unique units would be pretty bad from the position of a DA player, and to keep them if DA were folded into a generic codex they'd pretty much have to include an entirely separate DA list alongside the main marine one, the simplest way does seem to be to keep them as a separate book. I'm not sure why you are so hostile to them if you dint even play the armies.

I'm not hostile. I just feel the differences are too tiny atm, and something should be done about that, because atm it's just confusing

I haven't read Daemonkin, but it's got that Blood Tally mechanic, strict Khorne theme and the mixing of CSM/Daemons (sure you could do that with allies, but allies is not a concept we can judge a Codex by). That's a heck of a lot more character than Dark Angels have... and aren't half of those who play DA just rocking Deathwing/Belial armies or other gimmicky stuff?

It's all subject to taste ofc, but right now the old Relictors (with their Daemons Weapons and Icons) had more of a unique theme to them than Green Marines... yup the current codex is just that bland. I don't doubt DA players appreciate the differences and the more gimmicky builds... I'd like to as well.... which I can only hope that new codex of theirs will cater for...

Else I'll keep on playing against "marines of whatever colour is cool today"

Spiney Norman
01-06-2015, 08:45
I haven't read Daemonkin, but it's got that Blood Tally mechanic, strict Khorne theme and the mixing of CSM/Daemons (sure you could do that with allies, but allies is not a concept we can judge a Codex by). That's a heck of a lot more character than Dark Angels have... and aren't half of those who play DA just rocking Deathwing/Belial armies or other gimmicky stuff?


Now I'm confused, Deathwing and ravenwing are pretty much the defining characteristics of the dark Angels book, all the DA unique units are DW or RW specific, that is their 'thing', but you just dismiss it as a 'gimmick'? I'm not really sure what more you were expecting, and it's certainly something they wouldn't be able to do if they were just folded into the regular SM dex.

Wesser
01-06-2015, 10:41
Now I'm confused, Deathwing and ravenwing are pretty much the defining characteristics of the dark Angels book, all the DA unique units are DW or RW specific, that is their 'thing', but you just dismiss it as a 'gimmick'? I'm not really sure what more you were expecting, and it's certainly something they wouldn't be able to do if they were just folded into the regular SM dex.

Now admitted my gaming group goes to great lengths to field balanced armies with a bit of everything, so I'm a bit hampered by that perspective

But Ravenwing or Deathwing could easily be formations in the SM:Codex combined with Chapter Tactics: Dark Angels. Isn't the difference between Ravenwing and White Scars a question of the Dakka banner and Ravenwing have bad flyers? Couldn't we do a bit better for a whole new codex?

A Transport that carries Bikes, a flyer that sends speeding coordinates to bikes/jetbikes within 18' allowing them to jink without snap firing.... I mean something...

Spiney Norman
01-06-2015, 11:09
Now admitted my gaming group goes to great lengths to field balanced armies with a bit of everything, so I'm a bit hampered by that perspective

But Ravenwing or Deathwing could easily be formations in the SM:Codex combined with Chapter Tactics: Dark Angels. Isn't the difference between Ravenwing and White Scars a question of the Dakka banner and Ravenwing have bad flyers? Couldn't we do a bit better for a whole new codex?

A Transport that carries Bikes, a flyer that sends speeding coordinates to bikes/jetbikes within 18' allowing them to jink without snap firing.... I mean something...

Ravenwing have two unique flyers, two unique land speeders, a unique elite unit (black Knights) and a unique unit composition for their standard bikes (which includes an Attack bike and land speeder) as well as a unique version of the combat squad rule. They also have a unique command squad (it's made up of black knights), and while they could take the Dakka banner I'd rather take the ravenwing company banner, which IMHO is rather good.

In my view ravenwing is rather more interesting than Deathwing, but DW is quite a bit cheaper to build.

Silent Surrender
01-06-2015, 11:24
Well tactical marines taken as part of a dark angels force would ofcourse be dark angels tactical marines, unless they are from Another chapter. I dont understand the problem. Remember im arguing from GWs Point of view. Do you Think they would like you to walk around with just the dark angels codex, when they could make you buy the space marine codex as well?

And wasnt daemonkin released Before harlequins?

Spiney Norman
01-06-2015, 11:30
Well tactical marines taken as part of a dark angels force would ofcourse be dark angels tactical marines, unless they are from Another chapter. I dont understand the problem. Remember im arguing from GWs Point of view. Do you Think they would like you to walk around with just the dark angels codex, when they could make you buy the space marine codex as well?

And wasnt daemonkin released Before harlequins?

That's not really the point, I can't help but feel needing to use the allies system and two different codexes to cobble together an army from one space marine chapter feels like a whole new level of clunky weirdness. Harlequins are not just a subset of the craftworlds, they are a whole different Eldar subfaction altogether, as different to the Craftworlders as the dark Eldar are. The closest example would be the Admech release being split down into Skitarri and cult mechanicus, but I'm fairly sure the only reason they did that was because they didn't have any models to start with so it kind of made sense to do it in smaller waves so they didn't have 6-8 weeks of release schedule dedicated entirely to admech.

Imo Dark Angels are defined as much by what they don't have as what they do have, giving them all the codex marine toys like thunderfire cannons, centurions, storm Ravens/budgies, hunter/stalker would morph them into something they haven't been previously, even if it would make them more competitive.

Beppo1234
01-06-2015, 12:07
Well tactical marines taken as part of a dark angels force would ofcourse be dark angels tactical marines, unless they are from Another chapter. I dont understand the problem. Remember im arguing from GWs Point of view. Do you Think they would like you to walk around with just the dark angels codex, when they could make you buy the space marine codex as well?

And wasnt daemonkin released Before harlequins?

GW has tried this in the past. But it's not going to work today, not unless they dropp the codex size and price. This is what they did in 3E, and it was annoying as hell.

Nkari
02-06-2015, 08:47
So GW dont like duplicate choises in codexes. Maybe there wont be any vanilla choise like tactical squads etz. in future DA, BA and SW books?


If you even think this, then you have no clue about the space marine background..

Tactical squads are THE backbone of ALL chapters except when it comes to the wolves.. they are just wierd, but the other 999 chapters the tacticals are the backbone..

so no.. GW will NOT drop tactical squads for the 3 non "vanilla" marine codexes..

Silent Surrender
02-06-2015, 09:26
If you even think this, then you have no clue about the space marine background..

Tactical squads are THE backbone of ALL chapters except when it comes to the wolves.. they are just wierd, but the other 999 chapters the tacticals are the backbone..

so no.. GW will NOT drop tactical squads for the 3 non "vanilla" marine codexes..

And obviously you didnt get what I said at all. Sorry read again, and try again.

Darnok
02-06-2015, 09:43
And obviously you didnt get what I said at all. Sorry read again, and try again.

I think you are either confused about what you actually want to say, or really have no clue about how Space Marines work at all.

None of the variant chapters with books of their own (DA, BA, SW, GK) are like Harlequines at all. They are not some strange subfactions of Space Marines, but actually Space Marines "with a twist". They all use Tacticals etc., plus some units only they have access to. Harlequins are a functioning army of their own, without the need for the Eldar codex; both can ally, but it's not necessary. So what you propose is actually something different.

And I don't get the point of "GW doesn't like duplicate choices in codizes" either. Skitarii/AdMech, Daemonkin/Daemons/CSM - just two recent examples where a new "subfaction codex" actually has lots of duplicate choices in it. And exactly to provide everything in one book, rather than needing another codex to "ally in". If anything, GW likes to have duplicate choices in different codizes.

Beppo1234
02-06-2015, 12:37
I think you are either confused about what you actually want to say, or really have no clue about how Space Marines work at all.

None of the variant chapters with books of their own (DA, BA, SW, GK) are like Harlequines at all. They are not some strange subfactions of Space Marines, but actually Space Marines "with a twist". They all use Tacticals etc., plus some units only they have access to. Harlequins are a functioning army of their own, without the need for the Eldar codex; both can ally, but it's not necessary. So what you propose is actually something different.

And I don't get the point of "GW doesn't like duplicate choices in codizes" either. Skitarii/AdMech, Daemonkin/Daemons/CSM - just two recent examples where a new "subfaction codex" actually has lots of duplicate choices in it. And exactly to provide everything in one book, rather than needing another codex to "ally in". If anything, GW likes to have duplicate choices in different codizes.


exactly, GW wants to sell an 'all in one package' at a higher price.

InstantKarma
02-06-2015, 15:42
It seems noone get what I mean. I mean that future books like dark angels would become like the harlequins book. Everything dark angels specific will be in that book, all generic stuff like tactical marines and devastators you would need the space marine book to ally them in or to use a special formation to get them in your army. Maybe even use a statement that you can take troops from codex space marines like troops in a dark angels army etz.

Geez...

As an old geezer from 2nd Edition I cannot recall a time when DAs/BAs/ or space puppies DIDN'T have seperate codexes (even the Codex: Angels of Death was a combo DA/BA codex with essentially two seperate parts for both chapters) from vanilla marines.

The various specialized units do justify a seperate book, but not just in the sense of the new Harlequins to other Eldar. Dark Angels do not organize or use their forces in a way similar to vanilla marines, and part of the 6th ed Codex seemed to be to push this further with the introduction of new units/variants on existing Dark Angel forces; not on the generic Tac squad dudes.

If nothing else I'd much rather only pay for one codex than for two to be able to use Dark Angels.

Sephillion
02-06-2015, 16:07
It seems noone get what I mean. I mean that future books like dark angels would become like the harlequins book. Everything dark angels specific will be in that book, all generic stuff like tactical marines and devastators you would need the space marine book to ally them in or to use a special formation to get them in your army. Maybe even use a statement that you can take troops from codex space marines like troops in a dark angels army etz.

Geez...

Ew, paying two overpriced books instead of one so I can use my army? No thanks.

Beppo1234
02-06-2015, 16:25
Ew, paying two overpriced books instead of one so I can use my army? No thanks.

exactly... it worked back in the 3E era, when codexes were only 20 pages long, and cost just as much. But with today's format of codex? It would only alienate customers, especially with the speed at which the current rule books are being obsoleted.

MagicHat
02-06-2015, 18:04
I remember how upset DA players were when every SM codex ever were released after them, latest with codex: Grav.
As a BA player, it feels a bit rough that they release the new assault marines after our codex.
And I buy all the codicies anyway...

Have C: SM, let all their unit entries and formations have an Icon of the SM codicies that can take them (So Storm Raven have the Icon for vanilla marines and Blood Angels).
The individual variant codicies then have their specific Chapter Tactics, Detachment, formations, Relics, special units and unique unit options (Like BA meltaguns in assault squads, or Fast engines on Rhino chassis).

We are at a point were I don't think BA need more unique units, so if we could get this style of codex that stays like that for years, while the C: SM gets updated, then I would be very happy.

Silent Surrender
02-06-2015, 20:00
daemons and csm was released long ago. I didnt know ad mech had duplicates, what are their duplicates?

And ravenwing and deathwing work perfectly well without any duplication. But ok, dark angels are not to space marines what harlequins are to eldar. Its more like tactical squads etz are to dark angels what harlequins was to the eldar. And listen, im not speaking from a fluff perspective but purely from a lets see what GW has done recently and apply it to now perspective.

Lets now totaly forget what makes sense in a fluff perspective, since obviously GW does not make codex layout plans from a fluff perspective. Atleast not primarily.
Removing tactical marines and devastators etz. from the dark angels book would not mean removing them from the army or from them being included in the army in the fluff.
It would simply mean that there is no entry for them in the dark angels codex, and if you want to play them in your dark angels force its totally possible! You would just need to have a space marine codex as well.

And to Beppo, yes i had totally forgotten that! I dont praise this method, i dislike it myself. Im just speculating.

Darnok
03-06-2015, 04:12
daemons and csm was released long ago. I didnt know ad mech had duplicates, what are their duplicates?

And Khorne Daemonkin was released just months ago. The AdMech book has duplicates of basically everything in the Skitarii book.* For yet another example, look at "Astra Militarum" and "Militarum Tempestus".


Its more like tactical squads etz are to dark angels what harlequins was to the eldar.

Just no.


* ... I stand corrected, that statement was wrong

Ratbeast
03-06-2015, 05:35
Well the game already has enough traitors marine armies, GW can scrap dark angels, and still be plenty of traitors to kill

DYoung
03-06-2015, 06:01
I'm not hostile. I just feel the differences are too tiny atm, and something should be done about that, because atm it's just confusing

I haven't read Daemonkin, but it's got that Blood Tally mechanic, strict Khorne theme and the mixing of CSM/Daemons (sure you could do that with allies, but allies is not a concept we can judge a Codex by). That's a heck of a lot more character than Dark Angels have... and aren't half of those who play DA just rocking Deathwing/Belial armies or other gimmicky stuff?

It's all subject to taste ofc, but right now the old Relictors (with their Daemons Weapons and Icons) had more of a unique theme to them than Green Marines... yup the current codex is just that bland. I don't doubt DA players appreciate the differences and the more gimmicky builds... I'd like to as well.... which I can only hope that new codex of theirs will cater for...

Else I'll keep on playing against "marines of whatever colour is cool today"

Wow is it 2010 again?

dblaz3r
03-06-2015, 06:32
Well the game already has enough traitors marine armies, GW can scrap dark angels, and still be plenty of traitors to kill

This joke is still just as funny as the first time. :eyebrows::cheese:

MagicHat
03-06-2015, 10:35
And Khorne Daemonkin was released just months ago. The AdMech book has duplicates of basically everything in the Skitarii book. For yet another example, look at "Astra Militarum" and "Militarum Tempestus".


Cult Mechanicus have no Skitarii units in it though.

Darnok
03-06-2015, 13:55
Cult Mechanicus have no Skitarii units in it though.

I always thought so. Shame on me, you are right! :eek:

milk99
03-06-2015, 16:35
For our fluff.......our rules seriously a far cry from what was written in the codex. Deathwing knight weapons are a horrible downgrade, dark talon is a joke, the nephalim is an air inferiority fighter, the dark talon has disco lights........, landspeeder vengeance is so pathetic that it could blow itself up, darkshroud gives........stealth to unit? when it's supposedly armed with a mysterious relic from when caliban was shattered, and there are only a few of them in existence! And all it gives is......shroud and 2 hull points? this is beyond pathetic.

Grand Master Raziel
03-06-2015, 19:13
I'm going to defend the Dark Shroud. 2+ Jink saves. It automatically has 2+ Jink saves due to Shrouded, and giving all units within 6" Stealth means all Bike Squadrons with Skilled Riders also get 2+ Jink saves. That's any and all Ravenwing Knights (including RW Command Squadrons), and any RW Attack Squadron Sammael joins, as he confers Skilled Riders to the squadron he joins. That's actually pretty kickass, as long as you're not facing excessive amounts of Ignores Cover shooting.

sicarius68
03-06-2015, 20:32
This seems pretty far fetched to my even with the allies system. who would by a codex for one squad? (Says the guy that bought the skitarii and cult mechanicus codex)

TemperMaximus
03-06-2015, 22:19
Deathwing knight weapons are a horrible downgrade
What? Most of the rest you are correct about but DWK are legitimately good although far from overpowered or game-breaking. Their biggest shortcoming is trouble getting into combat in the first place.

AngryAngel
04-06-2015, 00:17
I kind of agree, I just think the ap on the maces is kind of pants aside from the one combat round they activate beast mode. The way the DWK are set up now they can't handle swarms, which is what the maces might be good for with their current ap if they didn't lack number of attacks. If they really made their maces a unique weapon, things could improve in their use. Give the maces ap 3 base, have ap 1 when they activate the beast mode with the str 10, and they would see alot more table time and be able to tackle most MC's which would give them a clear niche, one currently lacking with the ap 4.

I do believe the DWK aren't really good, but aren't really bad they are just meh, and I for one would like them to become good, and not meh.

milk99
04-06-2015, 02:13
What? Most of the rest you are correct about but DWK are legitimately good although far from overpowered or game-breaking. Their biggest shortcoming is trouble getting into combat in the first place.

Have you......even read the fluff of the deathwing knights?

Lion El Jason
04-06-2015, 13:18
I see a lot of comments from people who never actually PLAYED DW Knights.

Try them out, they are actually the best thing that was added to the current codex.

Beppo1234
04-06-2015, 14:35
Have you......even read the fluff of the deathwing knights?

fluff is fluff, it's supposed to be embellished and exaggerated. The game would be a hotter mess if it were defined by fluff.

Sephillion
04-06-2015, 14:51
I see a lot of comments from people who never actually PLAYED DW Knights.

Try them out, they are actually the best thing that was added to the current codex.

They’re also an excellent excuse to use an Interrogator-Chaplain, to reroll those Smite attacks.

InstantKarma
04-06-2015, 15:37
They’re also an excellent excuse to use an Interrogator-Chaplain, to reroll those Smite attacks.

Slap the Mace of Redemption on the Chapplain (in TDA) and he'll be pretty beastly in CC and give you some more AP3 to go along with the Sgt's flail after the smiting is complete.

milk99
04-06-2015, 16:25
I see a lot of comments from people who never actually PLAYED DW Knights.

Try them out, they are actually the best thing that was added to the current codex.

Trust me, I did. And against the new dexes, imp knights, they are a far cry. Yes, they are still useful, but their usefulness is soo limited that I doubt if I would want to run it.