PDA

View Full Version : Undecided: Black Templars or Dark Angels



TwilightOdyssey
06-09-2007, 14:49
I've been pretty much randomly collecting Space Marine models and would like to get them organized into some kind of ... uh, organized army. :)

I was originally very interested in Black Templars, but after browsing through the Codex I saw that they don't use Devastator squads. Now, I'm not married to my Devs, but I do have a unit and would like to use em.

I purchased the Dark Angels codex and have started reading through it, and will be getting the Black Templars codex this week. (Not to be controversial, but the DA army list appeared a bit beardy to me ... I think that the new Eldar list is more balanced, as far as new codexes go)

However, if anyone has tried both army lists, which do you prefer? And why?

Captain Micha
06-09-2007, 14:52
I've not tried the Da myself yet, but my friends Da are very powerful when played well. Like all good armies.

My Bts are abit more finesse needing than I thought they would be. I'm not sure which I'd recommend... since they are both awesome


Maybe play both

HiveFleetEzekial
06-09-2007, 14:57
BEARDY!? Pardon the all caps on that but.... what??? How in the world are they 'beardy'? This is truely a first. All we've heard mostly is either praise, or that it's near 'utter trash' and no longer any good playing them. You're going to have to explain how you came to... everyone.


Please, hop on over to the B&C when you're done and explain to the main DA community as well. (if not, I'll just copy/paste it myself) This is just shocking, to say the least.

Captain Micha
06-09-2007, 15:07
It's the fact that the Da reward good thinking and planning. I think...

I don't really see the uber cheese there but I can see where it can be used and abused. You just have to really look to find it. And most of it involves more of the tactics used than the army list itself per say.

pookie
06-09-2007, 15:23
depends, your dev sqaud can be split and the heavy weps put in Initiate sqds.

also would you like a CC oriantated army or something a little more Codex? if its the first BT for you, if its the second, then DA.

as you see from my Avatar im a BT player, but its down to you and your playing style, you'l always get people ( DA and BT alike ) saying choose 'My army' ( insert DA/BT there ) but i find its best to decide hwo you want to play, wether you want a mix or shooting and combat, or pure combat force ( you can get a flexible force from BT so dont think there all about the HtH side, its just a big part of there 'style)?

Putty
06-09-2007, 18:21
I'm a BT player.

I think you should choose DA, you get more choices, a funky new battleforce with DA specific models to build and also your codex will last a few years.

If you start BT, you'll end up in alot of grief when GW decides to revamp the BT codex.

The only reason why you would want to pick up BT is the fluff and the various kinky rule stuff like Vows and the compulsory Emperor's Champion (above certain points that is).

Also, learning curve for BT is very steep. If you are the sort to play to win, don't play BT.

FunkyCommissar
06-09-2007, 18:44
DA is fun, i bought the battleforce to use in a combat patrol (used the robed models to make a veterans squad) tournament back in may- lots of fun to model and paint (getting the robes as light as in the GW pictures is really hard though- like LOTS of coats), also they are pretty balanced in terms of assault and shooting, not to mention Ravenwing / Deathwing means you won't be driven mad by repetitively drybrushing every model DA green / snot green (and the scouts have S4 shotguns! not that it really matters, but hey!)
BT is awesome in combat, with things like righteous zeal, emperors champion, etc- stick powerfisted sgts, emperors champion, and a chaplain in a LRC and assault out of it and watch it tear through stuff
that being said, BT is kinda boring to paint- lots of black with thin grey highlights (of couse, neophytes and characters offer some more variety)
it comes down to your playstyle- balanced shooty/assault or assault out the wazoo?

inquisitor solarris
06-09-2007, 18:52
what's not to like a fully robed army a fellow staff member i know has a strong dark angels army plenty of devestators,deathwing/ravenwing and enough plasma guns to go around

Tulun
06-09-2007, 19:14
They don't have power fisted sargs in BT... just normal Initiates with fists (difference is 1 attack less :()

Anyway, it really depends on your style. Do you like the idea of a mainly shooty team, that has the choice of doing Terminator themed armies (Termies as troops is awesome! yay!) or Bike themed armies? go with DA.

If you wanna do a lot of CC, than do BT. BT has some interesting rules to help them reach combat, and the squad upgrade kit has some cool looking stuff. BTs are, in my opinion, the more fun army (simply because you have to play smart to do them right... DA style of team is generally stand and shoot nonsense), but it really depends what you prefer. BT can't shoot well, nor should they try to shoot well; they are built to reach combat, with some fire support to thin / aid them.

redbaron998
06-09-2007, 19:28
I like both as well and a few weeks ago was trying to decide whitch on to seriously invest in. I choose the DA codex with Guardians of the Covenant (coolest paint scheme ever IMO) I liked them more because it had a more organised feel and mostly felt more like space marines as the background represents them, as organized and efficent assault troops, though the Templars definetely have the aggresive crusading feel.

Also do you like Knights or Monks? I prefer monks myself as DA have that great monastic feel with the robes.

Also do you want a Librarian? If you and its a deal breaker than you would go with DA, as BT dont like pyskers at all.

Eithier way good luck and if ya need some list help (espically with DA) dont hesistate to post it (espically on the B&C DA site) or PM me.

If I was you I would get both codexs (cause they are both brilliant) and make some lists with each one, pick your faviorite with both and see witch one you like more, also playtesting them against each other always helps

Radish
06-09-2007, 19:54
I collect DA's and think they're awesome. I chose them because of their amazing background. 40k is all about the dark, gothic future where there is little hope, and I think the DA is the army that catches that atmosphere perfectly. We even shot down one of the BT battle ships but don't tell anybody.

Game wise, DA are very balanced (beardy my eye!) and the codex has a very nice layout IMO. BT are mainly assault so thats a big factor in which you should choose. DA have deathwing, ravenwing and loads of pieces for robed veterans and is all in plastic so you can make amazing conversions whilst most BT specific stuff is metal I believe. And as somebody else said, the BT will get a new codex sooner than DA which could ruin any army you've collected since then so the economical choice points towards DA.

But whichever catches your interest for longest should always be the one you go for.

Crassus
06-09-2007, 20:21
I play DA and and my friend plays BT and we're usually evenly matched. i sugest you go for spec rules and fluff to decide.

Meticulous
06-09-2007, 21:34
Didn't the BT get their new Codex, like, a year and half / two years ago? I hardly think that's enough of a time frame to say 'wait, wait!' What if they're nerfed with the new Codex?'

As for the original question...

I like the Dark Angels because their rules are simple, effective, and reward a combined-arms approach, not to mention having very cheap Rhinos.

I like the Black Templars because their upgrade sprue is wonderful, their character is as grim as I've seen among Space Marines, and they actually have special rules beyond Terminator Assault, not to mention squads of up to 20 men.

It's up to you, I guess. The Dark Angels would be more helpful to a new player, however. Black Templars aren't quite as well-rounded, as others have mentioned.

Hulkster
06-09-2007, 22:04
I would go for Dark Angels

more interesting fluff, easier army to use and Deathwing kick bums

Ktotwf
06-09-2007, 22:35
Its all about the Black Templars - coolest. space marine chapter. by far.

Chaplain Ark
06-09-2007, 22:47
BT= cool fluff
DA= sweet looking models.
personally, i'd say get the DA battle force, and paint them and consider them BT. leave it at that. best of both worlds.

Though if you read the BT fluff, you get kinda pissed at the DA, they killed a whole ship with over 90 battle brothers on it and less then a day before hand, we helped them take down a traitor fortress. So the combination might not go over too well for people who take fluff to seriously.

But another thing, if this is your first army, i would not suggest BT. Though they are awesome, and were my first army, they are much more difficult to play then DA or normal marines.

TwilightOdyssey
06-09-2007, 23:09
Thanks for all the replies.

I meant to post earlier, but my local cable provider blew up or something and I had no internet all afternoon. :)

I'm not surprised to find that only a few members have played both armies.

I shall get the BT codex this week and read through it. :)

Hulkster
06-09-2007, 23:10
I have played both armies and I prefer DA in every way

Chaplain Ark
06-09-2007, 23:11
don't do that just yet. get bitlord if you dont have it and download the BT and DA codexs and read through both. then decide.

SonofUltramar
06-09-2007, 23:14
Firstly i'll start by saying that I am very biased towards the BT's as I have 3000pts of them:D

The first ever Space Marine models i painted were Dark Angels back in the day many years ago but soon lost interest in their whole "look at us we were bad but don't ask or we'll kick your ass" attitude, I like the story of the Lion (in general) and the rivalry with Leman Russ and the Space Wolves. The army list is good, not what I would call beardy but hey lets not get into that. They are a good looking army with plenty of variety, well for a bunch of near Heretics;)

What really grabbed me about the Black Templers was their Zealousness(?) as it seems that in The Imperium most factions are content maintaining the status quo and holding onto what they have whereas the Templars are out their (yes, I know its made up) trying to make the foes of The Emperor pay for their influences on The Imperium and restore it to the glories of The Great Crusade. Army wise it is harder to use than DA's without a doubt but they can do shooting really well with small Initiate squads, Attack Bike squadrons and Land Speeders along with Terminators, Predators and Vindicators like most other Marines?

Painting wise Dark Angels are a striking force when done well but they can be very time intensive on units such as Deathwing and even the Battle Brothers can take a bit of work to look good as green isn't the greatest of colours especially when starting of with DA Green? Templars on the otherhand are pretty straightforward and with some thin Shadow Grey highlights and by spraying the shoulder pads white you can knock out a good looking force far quicker than most other armies?

End of the day it is entirely up to you and I would also advise getting both Codexes to read the background and get a good feel for the army before choosing, they're both good armies which play very differently if taken to their extremes?

Hope this helps

Good luck:)

HiveFleetEzekial
07-09-2007, 02:44
Firstly (DA side kicking in) "No we did *not* shoot down, destroy, and/or kill that BT cruiser. It was still intact when we left, after we got our target back from their overzealous hands. Their last transmission even proves it. They simply got lost in the warp after we were gone. (and that happens wuite a bit with the fickle way warp travel works)"


Second, Chaplain Ark.. please do not go around suggesting 'illegal'/free means of procuring rules for this game. That's a big no-no, here and every other forum.


And I'm still wondering Twilight, how you came to the conclusion that DA are "beardy". That truely is the first that such a claim has been heard since the new dex came out. It begs explaination...

Isolation
07-09-2007, 05:13
Have you thought about coming up with your own paint scheme for the marines themselves? Then you could buy enough of whatever side and play Dark Angels or Black Templar, depending upon your mood? I'm not really sure if this is frowned upon, talking about Tournament play, but I'd figure if you painted/modelled the miniatures appropriately for the type your playing for the tournament, *shrug*.

TwilightOdyssey
07-09-2007, 15:12
And I'm still wondering Twilight, how you came to the conclusion that DA are "beardy". That truely is the first that such a claim has been heard since the new dex came out. It begs explaination...
Sorry, I didn't have time to go into an explanation yesterday.
In my defense, I said a bit beardy and I personally don't find the codex as balanced as the new Eldar dex.

To me, having carte blanche to field a force whose sole intention seems to be to win tournaments (ie, 80 terminators in a single FOC) and can only realistically be defeated is by another similarly 'roided SM or Chaos SM force is a bit beardy.

HOWEVER, that has little to do with my primary objective: compare/contrast BT v DA. I'm buying the BT codex today and will give it a read.

Thanx for the posts thus far!

shin'keiro
07-09-2007, 15:59
Neither - do Eldar! lol - personally i prefer the Blood Angels Codex instead of BT or DA

TwilightOdyssey
07-09-2007, 16:09
Neither - do Eldar! lol - personally i prefer the Blood Angels Codex instead of BT or DA
LOL, precisely. Who cares? I just want to know, practically, how the two stack up in gameplay.

I have the DA dex, read through it, and applied my current SM models to a DA army list. I will do the same with the BT dex this weekend, play a game with each, and make up my own mind.

Thanx for the replies!

Kriegschmidt
07-09-2007, 16:21
To me, having carte blanche to field a force whose sole intention seems to be to win tournaments (ie, 80 terminators in a single FOC) and can only realistically be defeated is by another similarly 'roided SM or Chaos SM force is a bit beardy.

I need to comment here:
1) you can only have max. 45 terminators in one FOC (+Belial) (80 terminators would be about 3500pts+weapons, in at least 2 FOCs) :p
2) Deathwing are generally regarded as one of the hardest armies to play (if not the hardest). In a playable 1500 point army you can reckon on having around 25 models in your army, making up 5 or 6 scoring units. Which is nothing. They're unmaneouvrable, easy to reduce to non-scoring and their shooting range is virtually all limited to 24". People do win tournaments with them but only very clever people who can play them really, really well, which is an elusive skill. And with only 1 heay weapon per squad, you can't just point one DW squad at an enemy unit and destroy it. Which means that you generally have about half of your army firing at the same thing.

The reason I'm commenting on this is that you're asking for advice on making a decision.... and you seem to have a horribly wrong idea of the DA. I suspect you've looked at the Space Marine codex, where you can have 10-man terminator squads with two heavy weapons and multiplied this by 6 troops choices and 2 command squads. Not so! DW terminator squads are always 5 men. If you take Belial you can take them as troops (and I'm pretty sure still Elites as well, otherwise max. number is 30!!)*

Best to hear it from the horses' mouths and decide :)

*NOTE: On the other hand, they are a very engaging armyto play with and you shouldn't be put off! :) Look awesome on the table, too.

TwilightOdyssey
07-09-2007, 16:46
Thanks for the additional info, Kriegschmidt!

Kriegschmidt
07-09-2007, 16:51
No problem :) Obviously I'm going to strongly suggest you don't read my battle report of the game I lost with my Deathwing last night.

*cough* http://warseer.com/forums/40k-battle-reports/101661-eldar-take-deathwing-stronghold-1500-a.html. Ahem :D

EDIT: Oh, you already have....

Ruroni
07-09-2007, 17:00
I'm a long time BT player, and my two roomates have a ultramarine and DA army respectively. I can definitely agree that DA in all termie or deathwing/ravenwing combo aren't broken. Maybe good but not broken. DA is a really cool army. The combat squads, cheaper rhinos, and smoe other neat stuff make them really interesting to play. Ravenwing bikes are awesome, as is the deathwing turn 1 deepstrike.

It mostly comes down to as people above say, what you want to play like. DA are even less combat oriented than say codex marines, as they have limited access to assault specific wargear. They are a codex specified somewhat more shooty army. Though don't think that they are incapable in assault. Against less than MeQ assault capability like tau or IG you can still roll them with assault units. Templar are the polar opposite if you play them how they probably should be played. Whereas the vast majority of DA have bolters, BT have 2 ccw. Templar also couple the vows, emperor's champ, and some elite assault units in combination with these things to make a potent assault force. With the new chaos book I'd arguably say that they are the best loyal or traitor assault MEQ army. I'm partial to templar myself, I'm an assault man. I guess you could have more than a few with bolters but that imo is lame. Even if you do, you can do nothing but sigh as the enemy causes one measly casualty on your squad with a heavy weapon and you have to run at him and can't shoot it.

I can't say one is better than the other, I'm often jealous of the cool bolter codexyness of the DA and play my friends armies sometimes. To sum it up really it's simple:

If you want Bolters, tactical mobility of combat squads, devs, cool bike and termie rules, go DA.

If you want a more CC army that rocks out hard in CC, has vows, vet skills, and general fightyness, but is limited in ranged, go BT.

rintinglen
07-09-2007, 18:01
Neither codex is a fave of the power gamer tribe. my
BT have been singularly poor performers, to the point where they stay intheir box these days. They are something like 0-0-5 (wins, ties and losses). The DA are slightly better off, but they suffer badly for the "free" bolt pistols and grenades. When the codex first came out, there was a flurry of games involving them at the local bunker store, and they were 2-2-11 out of 15 games that I observed. Generally, they got spanked. Their terminators are not worth taking--period. If this codex is the sign of things to come, then space marine players better sell their armies now, while they still have some value. Jervis Johnson is the patron saint of marine haters.

Ronin_eX
07-09-2007, 18:07
DA are even less combat oriented than say codex marines, as they have limited access to assault specific wargear. They are a codex specified somewhat more shooty army. Though don't think that they are incapable in assault. Against less than MEQ assault capability like tau or IG you can still roll them with assault units.

This seems to be a big misconception about the Dark Angels. Just because we aren't marketed as the fourth Assaulty Marines chapter doesn't mean it is a weakness for us. We have no limits on assault squads and no reason not to use them (unlike in the last edition where we risked them standing still because they felt like it). Deathwing terminators can mix weapons and can form a devastating assault squad that can be equipped with a heavy weapon. We also have the Chapter/Deathwing/Ravenwing banners which adds an attack to everyone in the squad (even attached characters) which can be devastating when used with LC armed terminators (my BT friend is hates this squad). Then there is our veteran squad who have 2 attacks a piece and can be equipped to the nines for assault. Don't forget that cheap rhinos make it easy to create a fully mechanized force. Then last but not least we have Azrael who can get 7 S6 attacks on the charge and gives the whole squad he is in a 4+ invulnerable save.

People who call DA a shooty army will be greatly underestimating their ability in that field. Just because they aren't all armed with bolt pistols and chainswords does not mean that they are in any way bad at assault. Dark Angels strength is in their lack of weaknesses; they specialize in neither close combat nor in shooting but they are good at both. If I were to characterize Dark Angels I would probably call them the Shock Trooper army because they excel in hitting fast and hard and winning before the enemy has even realized they are defeated. Between easy mechanization, Deathwing Assault and the Ravenwing the Dark Angels have a lot of tools to get onto an objective quickly and hold it all game. So don't think of them as the shooty marines, think of them as the flexible marines.


Neither codex is a fave of the power gamer tribe. my
BT have been singularly poor performers, to the point where they stay intheir box these days. They are something like 0-0-5 (wins, ties and losses). The DA are slightly better off, but they suffer badly for the "free" bolt pistols and grenades. When the codex first came out, there was a flurry of games involving them at the local bunker store, and they were 2-2-11 out of 15 games that I observed. Generally, they got spanked. Their terminators are not worth taking--period. If this codex is the sign of things to come, then space marine players better sell their armies now, while they still have some value. Jervis Johnson is the patron saint of marine haters.

Hmm this seems to be a common thing as well, if an army doesn't win no one ever blames the players but the models. Did you think that maybe BT just aren't your style and that maybe those DA players were either figuring out how the new codex works or were simply not up for the new DA play style? I myself have had massive success with the new DA codex and have suffered very few losses (all of which were my fault). Most of these wins were because I use our "worthless" terminators so often I guess. I quite like the changes coming to marines (including Chaos) lately as they seem to improve the overall playability and dynamics of the army by making them... well... dynamic! Marines are starting to act like elite shock troopers of the Imperium again instead of being a static gunline (this is the IG's job, SM don't do protracted sieges except in rare cases). So with that I hope every one who dislikes the changes does go on to other armies and maybe balance out the metagame population for once and leave those who enjoy playing marines for reasons other than relative codex power to their own devices.

SonofUltramar
07-09-2007, 18:12
I guess you could have more than a few with bolters but that imo is lame. Even if you do, you can do nothing but sigh as the enemy causes one measly casualty on your squad with a heavy weapon and you have to run at him and can't shoot it.

Minor point but you move in your opponents turn after the morale check so in your turn if you don't move you can still fire heavy weapons.

Also as a Templar man myself, and having been so for about 8 years, I think that saying that using Bolters is lame is a bit of a strange thing to say as Templars need fire support and while my army is mainly CC orientated I do use a couple of small squads to provide fire support along with my Dereadnought and Predator. I respect your opinion that you feel they are lame but I personally like having a shooting phase that can be effective, even with Templars?

I have to admit I was tempted to do a shooting Templar army for something totally different but couldn't get away from a Chaplain leading a huge squad and slapping people real bad in combat:)

Captain Micha
07-09-2007, 18:16
Neither codex is a fave of the power gamer tribe. my
BT have been singularly poor performers, to the point where they stay intheir box these days. They are something like 0-0-5 (wins, ties and losses). The DA are slightly better off, but they suffer badly for the "free" bolt pistols and grenades. When the codex first came out, there was a flurry of games involving them at the local bunker store, and they were 2-2-11 out of 15 games that I observed. Generally, they got spanked. Their terminators are not worth taking--period. If this codex is the sign of things to come, then space marine players better sell their armies now, while they still have some value. Jervis Johnson is the patron saint of marine haters.

If that was the kind of mentality I went with, with my Tau and Necrons I'd never have played them after 15 games. ALL 15 were losses on my Tau and Crons. coincidentally the 16th game which was going to make me determine whether I was going to keep them around or not were the two I won. I'm glad I gave them another shot, because they are some of the most fun armies for me to play out of my humble collection.

Ps, my Da friend's record is about 5-5-6 right now. Not saying he's better than you or your game group but stats really don't prove much at that stage.

It's called you aren't used to the new rules you are going to suck for a good while afterwards. period.

winter has ended
07-09-2007, 18:29
omg how freaky lol, i was having this same problem a few days ago
i went for dark angels as i prefered their history and models and also i didnt really want my army running around from taking casualties lol
btw dark angels are not beadry, the best force for them is the all rounder one with normal, deatwing and ravening wing

MojoMadness
07-09-2007, 18:34
I gotta go with the DA.

Deathwing...mmmmm

Chaplain Ark
08-09-2007, 00:23
Firstly (DA side kicking in) "No we did *not* shoot down, destroy, and/or kill that BT cruiser. It was still intact when we left, after we got our target back from their overzealous hands. Their last transmission even proves it. They simply got lost in the warp after we were gone. (and that happens wuite a bit with the fickle way warp travel works)"

Second, Chaplain Ark.. please do not go around suggesting 'illegal'/free means of procuring rules for this game. That's a big no-no, here and every other forum.


I'm not angry or trying to incite a fight, but can you please point out what i said that was illegal in game terms.

And the way it was said in the BT codex made it seem like the DA killed them to prevent them from being witness. Thats just how i perceived it. Even you have to admit that it seems a bit fishy.


Neither - do Eldar! lol - personally i prefer the Blood Angels Codex instead of BT or DA

BA have a codex? i only have seen DA, BT, and SM.

Isolation
08-09-2007, 00:36
Yes, the official Blood Angels dex is on the GW main site, if you go to the 40k section and look under Marines, then Blood Angels, you'll find it there. You could also go to the FAQ section, it comes with a FAQ built in.

After thinking about it a little, I'd probably say DA, its a core force, with some goodies, and can be steered towards specialization if you so choose. BT seem like, assault, and only assault.

HiveFleetEzekial
08-09-2007, 00:48
I'm not angry or trying to incite a fight, but can you please point out what i said that was illegal in game terms.

Oh, I was just thinking.. this:

don't do that just yet. get bitlord if you dont have it and download the BT and DA codexs and read through both. then decide.
is 'illegal'/free means of procuring rules for this game (I never said anything about 'game terms). A very frowned upon action (akin to posting individual point values/giving full quotes of rules from the BGB or codeci). Even if it's being suggested with the thought of it being temporary, or as a 'personal use' copy if a person doesn't want to go digging through their box or whatever to find the physical copy, it's still a no-no on most (decent anyways) forums.




And the way it was said in the BT codex made it seem like the DA killed them to prevent them from being witness. Thats just how i perceived it. Even you have to admit that it seems a bit fishy..

I was just stating that, in general, not directly to you. And I responded based on how it's written in the BT codex (the only place it's written, AFAIK). We left, they sent their last transmission a little bit later, then entered the warp and haven't been heard from since. (the snippet is meant to imply that it happened, it never actually says it did. It's just fuel for the overzealous fire that the BT have against anything that doesn't like them and/or the 'God Emperor')

aad
08-09-2007, 01:09
i was thinking about one of these two chapters too

-but when i read that it is fluffwise posible to make mortis pattern dreadnoughts(dreads with two of the same weapon arms),
-the first two compagnies are different than the other 8.
-terminator compagnie and an biker/speeder compagnie.
-me likes them both.
-i personally love the big guns, devastator squads.. you can wake me up for that.
then i was hooked on the dark angels... well... a successor chapter that is...
:).

for me its oke when people make first founding and second founding chapters,
but i just want to make it more like my ideas, choose your own colors,markings,names, and vehicles...
and with the black templars well i can,t judge much about them but there is not much to do with them to personalize them to yourself.
there black,there mean, there zealous,there more of them than any other chapter:wtf:

maybe you can make black templar but make them blue templar and use the same rules.

well i realize color is not your problem, but read much about the both of them
i personally think that the dark angels are more of a chapter you can put your creativity in.:)

maybe that,s an idea for you??

Starchild
08-09-2007, 03:10
Beyond play style, models, and background, the tie-breaker for me is definately the special characters. The Dark Angels have the Black Templars beat in that regard.

exsulis
08-09-2007, 08:55
Hmm this seems to be a common thing as well, if an army doesn't win no one ever blames the players but the models. Did you think that maybe BT just aren't your style and that maybe those DA players were either figuring out how the new codex works or were simply not up for the new DA play style? I myself have had massive success with the new DA codex and have suffered very few losses (all of which were my fault). Most of these wins were because I use our "worthless" terminators so often I guess.


Sorry but DA termies are pretty worthless. I might have more losses with DA termies than most people would dream of. Its doesn't matter what your doing the inflexability with the rediculous price comined with the useless ability to get yourself killed on turn one is just dumb. Not to mention the loss of that second heavy weapon(not the second assault cannon).

In every game I've tried to use a DW army the closest I've gotten since the new dex has come out is 5 VP over getting a draw with them. And thats going from a army that while hard to use was still do able.

After shelfing my Termies my win ratio went from 0 wins 2 draws, and 25 losses to 20 wins 19 draws, and 5 losses. And thats within the first 4 months of the DA release.

The rest of the Dex is okay but compared to Chaos the dex is a bit lack luster. Combined with JJ horrid codex writing the DA dex just needs to be redone. Consequently, some of the same poor wording exists in the Chaos dex which I would have hoped GW would have fixed.


I've been having more fun with my BT army. Granted no Devie squads, and no scouts. I can say I don't really miss those options in a BT list. You've got more decent options in a BT list than DA. Theres just why GW why did you do this to the DA.

I concur BT can have a steep learning curve but so does the current DA dex. Each has its own emphasis on what they are ment to do. BT have the whole mech landraider/vindcator system, and DA have cheaper vehicles over all. BT you can have massive foot sloggers, while DA does a better job at mass scoring units(termies not included). So it comes down to how you want to play.

winter has ended
08-09-2007, 10:56
no offence but wow you must of been using those termies worng to lose that many matches wi them,
the mixed drk angel army is one of the best a space marine army can get

TwilightOdyssey
08-09-2007, 13:16
Well, I picked up the BT codex last night and gave it a good read-through.

It's a very interesting army list, and I would love to see it against Orks. But otherwise, I found the list itself to be a bit too finicky for my taste. One of the things that bothers me about the codex in general is how the fluff in the intro builds up this force that uses orbital strikes to soften the enemy and then uses drop pods to disrupt their formation, surgically strike their HQ, and force their way outwards ... but there's no Oribital Strike available in the Heavy Support slot!! Lame. I'm not a big fan of Orbital Strikes, as they are pretty random and can hurt either player, but just having the option in the list to match the fluff (or at least having them the BT player to always have the option of using Preliminary Bombardment or similar) would have gone a long way towards my enjoying the list more. And I don't think Oribital Strike would unbalance the list at all ...

I added up the points of my SM models against the DA list and came up with about 850 points; way less points than when I was using Codex: Space Marines.

I plan on playing a 1,000 pt DA v Eldar or Tau game this weekend, and will give the list a good workout and see how it goes.

Thanx for all the input on the subject! I have to agree with the majority of posters, however; the DA list is far more refined (simplified?) than the BT list -- you can figure out your points in a matter of moments (just like the Eldar codex) instead of nickling/diming like crazy with all those +1 and +2 frag/krak grenades.

Meticulous
08-09-2007, 16:35
Orbital Strikes are available from the Daemonhunters list; any Imperial army can take them.

suplicor
08-09-2007, 16:44
Of the 2,I would have to pick Dark Angels. I almst played Black Templars,but I wasn't thrilled with the Righteous Zeal rule,I don't like being forced to move.

Raven1
08-09-2007, 16:53
That's a tough choice. I would go with the DA.

youalso should have made this a poll

SonofUltramar
08-09-2007, 17:08
Orbital Strikes are available from the Daemonhunters list; any Imperial army can take them.

No Heavy Support can be take as Allies so no Orbitial Strikes for anyone except DaemonHunters and Witchunters.

Ruroni
08-09-2007, 18:11
@ ultramar - I meant majority bolters battle brother. I see some kids in my area with templar armies without barely a stitch of CC troops, and not cause they thought it would be a cool twist, but because they were just clueless.

Also when I said that DA were less assault oriented I didnt mean they were incapable. Lack of terminator honors and certain wargear combos makes it a tiny bit more limited than say codex is all. The vets are pretty cool with azrael as a counter argument, but overall with init 7 librarians etc, codex has them beat.

A lot of people also think templars to be a very hard army to play. I don't get that myself, I've been very successful with them, even more so than tyranids, and really I just take simple options and run forwards tactically engaging enemies and winning more often than losing.

@ Twilight - I think the list entries are decieving, you can make a templar list in a VERY short amount of time. Really it's just

A Commander or chaplian or some combo
Emperor's Champ
Probably a squad of assault termies
maybe sword brethren
3-4 units of regular troops
an assault squad
a vindicator
a LRC

There's other things of course, but those are no brainers. No vet sarges mean even less work calculating. Just add some rhinos, figure out where you want your HQs and stir.

Sons of Russ
08-09-2007, 19:57
use the Dark Angels Codex, but that doesnt mean you have to collect Dark Angels ,nor even their successors.

The great thing about GW's more abstract approach is that "counts as" is now sanctioned. It even specifically stated that all "named" special characters can be used to count as a cool character in your army that can use different chapter colours, a different model (most wargear should be represented) and even your own background and fluff.

Anyone who wishes to argue the point can show me where all the DA bolt pistols are modelled on the GW studio army....:cheese:

The DA codex is the shape of things to come for all things space marine (save perhaps the Wolves of Fenris).

I use the Blood Angels Codex for my Imperial Fists. It works well to represent the more orthodox, balanced, and streamlined approach GW is taking these days...

SonofUltramar
08-09-2007, 20:42
Thanx for all the input on the subject! I have to agree with the majority of posters, however; the DA list is far more refined (simplified?) than the BT list -- you can figure out your points in a matter of moments (just like the Eldar codex) instead of nickling/diming like crazy with all those +1 and +2 frag/krak grenades.

Odd thing really but what you've said seems to go against what the vast majority of gamers have said, simplified army lists which remove alot of options compared to the standard Codex are a bad thing?

While I think the DA Codex is very user friendly for army list purposes I personally think that the DA, BA, Eldar and now CSM Codexes seem to have had alot of the options removed which in turn reduces a players creativity and leads to alot of armies having very similar units, especially characters?

Just another point of view i guess?

Sons of Russ
08-09-2007, 21:27
Odd thing really but what you've said seems to go against what the vast majority of gamers have said, simplified army lists which remove alot of options compared to the standard Codex are a bad thing?

While I think the DA Codex is very user friendly for army list purposes I personally think that the DA, BA, Eldar and now CSM Codexes seem to have had alot of the options removed which in turn reduces a players creativity and leads to alot of armies having very similar units, especially characters?

Just another point of view i guess?

This was done so that even though lists may not have as much special rules variety, every game fields a more balanced army that can and will have to use different tactics and combined unit support to win the day.

What happens when you give boatloads of special rules to an armylist is people begin to max out specialized, optimized armies that are essentially one-trick ponies and the effect is actually far more boring games.

Those that argue that they are fluff players are full of it. They are power gamers trying to wear sheeps clothing.

Anyone who really plays to fluff will model lots of conversions and extra touches that have no effect on the game mechanic.

I am modelling silencers and muzzle breaks on ALL my bolter marines....does that mean I should whine that GW should give me the infiltrators USR for +1/+3 pts all my marines...?

NO.

Most of the new Chaos Marine Codex detractors thought it was their birthright to field speed/infiltrating/2+ save DP's for less than 200 pts....

Tank Hunter Autocannons FTW! :cheese: :rolleyes:

chinnfrequent
08-09-2007, 21:39
Of the 2,I would have to pick Dark Angels. I almst played Black Templars,but I wasn't thrilled with the Righteous Zeal rule,I don't like being forced to move.

It doesn't force you to move, but that's another thread.

To me the choice is very simple. You want more melee, play templar. You want more shooty, play angels.

SonofUltramar
08-09-2007, 23:33
This was done so that even though lists may not have as much special rules variety, every game fields a more balanced army that can and will have to use different tactics and combined unit support to win the day.

What happens when you give boatloads of special rules to an armylist is people begin to max out specialized, optimized armies that are essentially one-trick ponies and the effect is actually far more boring games.

Those that argue that they are fluff players are full of it. They are power gamers trying to wear sheeps clothing.

Anyone who really plays to fluff will model lots of conversions and extra touches that have no effect on the game mechanic.

I am modelling silencers and muzzle breaks on ALL my bolter marines....does that mean I should whine that GW should give me the infiltrators USR for +1/+3 pts all my marines...?

NO.

Most of the new Chaos Marine Codex detractors thought it was their birthright to field speed/infiltrating/2+ save DP's for less than 200 pts....

Tank Hunter Autocannons FTW! :cheese: :rolleyes:

I'm not saying give an army tons of special rules and tons of wargear but its the simple things like being able to take Artificer armour for the super shiny character with cool armour on but instead DA (and BA) Captains now come with a really rare piece of Wargear (Iron Halo) as standard, how does that make sense?

My army is so fluffy (you may think its an actual sheep) and if i win a game it's because I have to work really hard to get it, its not down to the special rules or characters (talking about my Guard by the way) and most of the time i'm satisfied with a draw. To me though its the little bits and pieces that can make peoples armies different. Using Guard and Chaos as examples there are loads of these two armies where I play and i've never seen two people come up with the same army but now there are 3 Chaos players who have near identical lists under the new Codex and I think thats a worrying trend for future Codexes as it seems that where there was plenty of choice before we'll suddenly see a handfull of identical lists for any given Codex?

Maybe i'm just stuck in my ways but I like the later 3rd Ed Codexes such as IG, SM, Tau with Armouries with loads of little army specific pieces of Wargear like Experimental weapons and trademark items, hardly all conquering things but a reason to model specific things that you CAN use in your army. Using your example if they did give you the option for silencers even if it wasn't that great (like Naamans old rules?) you'd still be inclined to use them if you could as it fits the fluff and narritively makes sense in addition to being something cool to do. Trouble is that most people only convert because they want to make a model that GW doesn't make and if they take options away I think it will lead to less conversion thereore more generic (you could say bland or even boring ) armies?

Ronin_eX
09-09-2007, 03:30
Sorry but DA termies are pretty worthless. I might have more losses with DA termies than most people would dream of. Its doesn't matter what your doing the inflexability with the rediculous price comined with the useless ability to get yourself killed on turn one is just dumb. Not to mention the loss of that second heavy weapon(not the second assault cannon).

In every game I've tried to use a DW army the closest I've gotten since the new dex has come out is 5 VP over getting a draw with them. And thats going from a army that while hard to use was still do able.

After shelfing my Termies my win ratio went from 0 wins 2 draws, and 25 losses to 20 wins 19 draws, and 5 losses. And thats within the first 4 months of the DA release.

The rest of the Dex is okay but compared to Chaos the dex is a bit lack luster. Combined with JJ horrid codex writing the DA dex just needs to be redone. Consequently, some of the same poor wording exists in the Chaos dex which I would have hoped GW would have fixed.


I've been having more fun with my BT army. Granted no Devie squads, and no scouts. I can say I don't really miss those options in a BT list. You've got more decent options in a BT list than DA. Theres just why GW why did you do this to the DA.

I concur BT can have a steep learning curve but so does the current DA dex. Each has its own emphasis on what they are ment to do. BT have the whole mech landraider/vindcator system, and DA have cheaper vehicles over all. BT you can have massive foot sloggers, while DA does a better job at mass scoring units(termies not included). So it comes down to how you want to play.

Read my post again. Why blame the models when the player is at fault? Terminators may not be your style but they are certainly mine. I use them as my exclusive troop unit in my army and they work fantastically (I've used our awesome tactical squads only a handful of times). Besides in playing a DW army you restricted yourself in a way GW never forced you to (i.e. all terminators). When you limit yourself the result will usually be more challenging. Themed lists shouldn't be taken for their power but because the player enjoys them. So while it is more than possible to do well with a DW army not all will meet with success until they figure out how the list is best played.

Diversify a little and use the strengths of the DA list (which is its flexibility). Terminators aren't perfect all-rounders (nothing is) and like any other marine trooper they need support. The biggest weakness of the 3rd edition DW list was the lack of heavy support. They need never suffer that again as now I can take a load of Deathwing and back them up with Devastators and bikes. DWA backed up with big guns can be a devastating way to enter the table. There are still many players who do well with DW armies but it is really tough as they are an artificial limitation that takes away some of the flexibility of the DA. Some people like the challenge and some don't.

It also sounds like you were using DWA in a highly predictable and suicidal manner. Does the rule state "drop right next to the enemy" or "deep strike in the open?" No, it simply allows you to drop terminators in on the first turn guaranteed. So pop them into good defensive positions or inside some ruins or on top of an objective. Seriously DWA makes them highly flexible and able to deploy where they are most needed after your opponent has already set up. Add in scouting bikes and you can even bring them in with perfect accuracy. I have yet to have my terminator squads die on the first turn (sometimes they don't even take casualties). DWA requires thought, it isn't a mindless power that you can just fire and forget. It has to be made part of your battle plan (or even not used if the fight requires it). This is just another case of user error being blamed on the rules.

exsulis
10-09-2007, 09:19
no offence but wow you must of been using those termies worng to lose that many matches wi them,
the mixed drk angel army is one of the best a space marine army can get


Did ya read my post "Deathwing Army?" IE: Termies, Dreads, and Landraiders.
As for using them the wrong way you mean getting them killed because they no longer have the same firepower as they used to. Or mobility once they hit the ground after DS(thats if DS doesn't kill them)?

The one nice thing about not having LR as dedicated Transports is being able to pick up any termie squad and move them.

In a 1500 pt game the odds of using a LR are kinda small since they get blown up pretty easy atm.


Read my post again. Why blame the models when the player is at fault? Terminators may not be your style but they are certainly mine. I use them as my exclusive troop unit in my army and they work fantastically (I've used our awesome tactical squads only a handful of times). Besides in playing a DW army you restricted yourself in a way GW never forced you to (i.e. all terminators). When you limit yourself the result will usually be more challenging. Themed lists shouldn't be taken for their power but because the player enjoys them. So while it is more than possible to do well with a DW army not all will meet with success until they figure out how the list is best played.

I did read your post, and it has no bearing on what happens to a DW army. I'm not blaming the models I'm blaming poor rules writing, a lack of common sense on points cost, and balance. As neither equals what DW can't do. Termies used to be my style. As in I have 50 terminator models in my army that doesn't do anything anymore. My dreads, and LR still get used but not the termies.

DW was a challeng now they don't do jack!




Diversify a little and use the strengths of the DA list (which is its flexibility). Terminators aren't perfect all-rounders (nothing is) and like any other marine trooper they need support. The biggest weakness of the 3rd edition DW list was the lack of heavy support. They need never suffer that again as now I can take a load of Deathwing and back them up with Devastators and bikes. DWA backed up with big guns can be a devastating way to enter the table. There are still many players who do well with DW armies but it is really tough as they are an artificial limitation that takes away some of the flexibility of the DA. Some people like the challenge and some don't.


In all honesty I've tried to used them a couple times as a strong anchor on objectives, table quarters with the rest of my DA army, and they pretty much fail to earn their points back. Keeping them in range of other squads for mutual fire support but they pretty much end up dying anyways.

Challenges I like impossible odds not so much. As I implied in my last post I could win with the DA army in 3rd. It was hard but now its just rediculous.




It also sounds like you were using DWA in a highly predictable and suicidal manner. Does the rule state "drop right next to the enemy" or "deep strike in the open?" No, it simply allows you to drop terminators in on the first turn guaranteed. So pop them into good defensive positions or inside some ruins or on top of an objective. Seriously DWA makes them highly flexible and able to deploy where they are most needed after your opponent has already set up. Add in scouting bikes and you can even bring them in with perfect accuracy. I have yet to have my terminator squads die on the first turn (sometimes they don't even take casualties). DWA requires thought, it isn't a mindless power that you can just fire and forget. It has to be made part of your battle plan (or even not used if the fight requires it). This is just another case of user error being blamed on the rules.

My usual deployment if I'm starting them on the board is in cover, or in a Landraider(standard, crusader, or promethus). You know dropping them next to a enemy unit(only one) is not so bad if I can block LOS but no I didn't drop them out in the open in front of the enemy army, and say "Here shoot me." I've had DS kill off 3 whole squads in one turn though. :wtf: Thats not even from enemy shooting, then you've got deviation which can, and will drop your squads in random spots. Which opens them up to a whole can of hurt, and thus death. DWA is only reliable for the first turn, and doesn't stop deviation!! Thats not flexable, thats 100% inflexable, and it only applies to half your squads.

Um, no kidding DW aren't just heres my army, you quit now. Never have, and never will be a instant win but getting kicked in the teeth rules wise is just dumb.

Heres a question for you are DW termies 13 pts better than chaos termies, or 8 more points than BA termies?

inquisitor solarris
10-09-2007, 12:11
i would go with dark angels just because a templar army fixes on close combat but lacks long range weapons without being shot at and charging the emeny while as da idea was to hold against anyone they have the ravenwing/deathwing which would take care of the messy job

fracas
10-09-2007, 12:41
i second the consideration for BA

Ronin_eX
10-09-2007, 22:29
Heres a question for you are DW termies 13 pts better than chaos termies, or 8 more points than BA termies?

Yup and yup. Chaos terminators are good but they still have to pay to get all the nice extras. Blood Angel termies can't mix weapons and are in an army with absolutely no teleport homers which almost forces them to pay for transport in order to make it onto the table without any mishaps. Oh and fearless makes DW great for holding objectives as they wont suddenly decide it isn't that great of an idea and abandon their position. This means they'll be causing damage to the last man and that is worth the extra points.

All I can say is that from the way it sounds terminators aren't your cup of tea but you have yet to prove to me why you find them useless. All I can say is that you just don't seem to be using them well. That isn't the fault of the rules or the unit, it's all you.

Also the constant harping on how pure DW armies are weak still seems silly because we are no longer forced to play like that (really the DW army never existed in 2nd edition and I'm glad it is gone in 4th). In any case pure DW forces have never been common in fluff, the only instance of it ever happening was in the story Deathwing. So really pure DW or even pure RW is kind of over-specialized and goes against the tactical flexibility that the DA are known for. So of course a rare, over-specialized themed list will be weaker than using the whole list. The problem seems to be that you were expecting DW to be better than they should. If they were so good that the only thing you ever needed to take was a bunch of terminators wouldn't that make them unbalanced or make the rest of the force rather poor in comparison?

DW are meant to work with the rest of the list, not fill in all its niches. Unlike you I have found a great deal of success with them and use at least a squad in every game and they always do well excepting the times when a roll poorly. I have found nothing bad about their rules and I certainly haven't had any problems with lack of firepower. So I'm sorry if I can't see your problem with them because I find them to be a very viable unit that can hold their own. They're cheaper than they used to be, they lost stubborn and gained the better fearless, they got point breaks on two of the three heavy weapons (makes heavy flamers a lot more useful now that they are half price), they have a great rule that allows them to choose when and where they attack, they can be given a standard bearer and an apothecary (single most useful upgrade for the command squad ever), and they can mix heavy weapons and assault weapons. How is that not an improvement over the BA terminators (the Chaos terminators are more versatile but they pay for it)?

I guess it comes down to play style in the end, no unit is really ever useless as long as you know how to use it. Making concrete statements about a unit being useless tend to be a misconception on the part of the person making the statement. Deathwing Terminators are far from useless and are one of the best parts of the DA list for the reasons previously stated.

So for the OP... play DA because their terminators rock. :D

warchild9
11-09-2007, 01:57
dark angels
I have both dexes but DA is so much better plus Deathwing and Ravenwing

TwilightOdyssey
11-09-2007, 02:34
Thanx for all the comments!

I have decided to use the DA list, and add a full 9th Company for Apocalypse. :)

I am going to make an army using the BT list, but it's going to be a proxy army to represent the Fallen!! :) :)

Ruroni
11-09-2007, 02:48
Not to split hairs, but you know the fallen are mortal enemies of the DA right? you couldn't really use them together. Also they aren't CC oriented like the BT are. Shame you didn't pick BT, but just make sure you didn't pick it because of people saying LOLZOMG this wun's better and picked based on a CC vs a codexy army.

Master Bait
11-09-2007, 03:03
eh?

it sounds like a perfectly sweet idea.

no where did he say he wanted to include the fallen with his DA army, nor did he say they'd necessarily be CC oriented. he just wants to proxy and i think it's a nice, sensible decision

downundercadet07
11-09-2007, 03:11
Good choice. The DA are essentially four armies, a regular SM force, an all biker force, an all termy force, or a really bike and termy heavy SM force.

exsulis
11-09-2007, 03:24
Yup and yup. Chaos terminators are good but they still have to pay to get all the nice extras. Blood Angel termies can't mix weapons and are in an army with absolutely no teleport homers which almost forces them to pay for transport in order to make it onto the table without any mishaps. Oh and fearless makes DW great for holding objectives as they wont suddenly decide it isn't that great of an idea and abandon their position. This means they'll be causing damage to the last man and that is worth the extra points.

Base Chaos termies are about the same as DA termies, can be upgraded to lager squad sizes, and since their cheap you'll have more of them. The marks aren't over priced for what they do.

Mixed weapons is cool on paper but it isn't worth its salt in a 5 man squad a couple deaths and your no longer scoring, and can't hold objectives. I'd rather pay for a drop pod, at least then they end up surviving the drop, creates cover, and an extra fire point(who wants to waste a squad's worth of shooting for an extra 25 VP?). Fearless is again cool on paper but sucks it up in CC where the extra armor saves can be death to small squads. Lets face it small squads tend to get mashed in CC which isn't where termies are the greatest.

You know how long it took to create a "broken" chaos list with the new dex? About 5 minutes which is even shorter than making a cheesy BA list, and arguably you can do that by accident.



All I can say is that from the way it sounds terminators aren't your cup of tea but you have yet to prove to me why you find them useless. All I can say is that you just don't seem to be using them well. That isn't the fault of the rules or the unit, it's all you.

You really don't see DW armies doing well in any sort of game these days. Hmm, going from DW being a decent fire-base/scoring unit to fodder isn't really a inprovement. Hmm, I've heard that argument a couple times. Heres an idea switch to a all DW army, and play someone who really wants to win. Lets see how well you do, and I don't mean play people that just started within the last 4 months. If it was just me then why don't you see too many DW armies out there? Sure, you see a few sadists who abuse themselves on this list but do you see people winning tournaments hands down? I know full well how the DW used to work theres even the fun stuff you could pull with how they used to play. Most of that is gone though some of it was abusive of the SM codex.



Also the constant harping on how pure DW armies are weak still seems silly because we are no longer forced to play like that (really the DW army never existed in 2nd edition and I'm glad it is gone in 4th). In any case pure DW forces have never been common in fluff, the only instance of it ever happening was in the story Deathwing. So really pure DW or even pure RW is kind of over-specialized and goes against the tactical flexibility that the DA are known for. So of course a rare, over-specialized themed list will be weaker than using the whole list. The problem seems to be that you were expecting DW to be better than they should. If they were so good that the only thing you ever needed to take was a bunch of terminators wouldn't that make them unbalanced or make the rest of the force rather poor in comparison?

I expect them to play as a really elite army that must avoid lots of multi-shot enemies until I can kill those units. They should be able to hold a table quarter, or objective without half the army backing them up. I played at the end of second, and third is where I got my pratice with this army. The big difference is now the units are smaller(die quicker, and loose scoring status), loss of fire power, can't survive witout half the army backing them up. I'm not saying you just drop the squad, and run but you shouldn't ever devot 700 some odd points to ensure a 250pt unit's survival.

DW armies used to play more like a pure GK Daemon hunters list. Same problem no heavy weapons except the ones on the dreads.



DW are meant to work with the rest of the list, not fill in all its niches. Unlike you I have found a great deal of success with them and use at least a squad in every game and they always do well excepting the times when a roll poorly. I have found nothing bad about their rules and I certainly haven't had any problems with lack of firepower. So I'm sorry if I can't see your problem with them because I find them to be a very viable unit that can hold their own. They're cheaper than they used to be, they lost stubborn and gained the better fearless, they got point breaks on two of the three heavy weapons (makes heavy flamers a lot more useful now that they are half price), they have a great rule that allows them to choose when and where they attack, they can be given a standard bearer and an apothecary (single most useful upgrade for the command squad ever), and they can mix heavy weapons and assault weapons. How is that not an improvement over the BA terminators (the Chaos terminators are more versatile but they pay for it)?


Gratz to you on finding a spot for them in your army but I haven't which puts my little guys sitting on a shelf. And I have such fond memories of plopping down a small army, and calling done. With the rules changes from 3rd to 4th some of those weapons really needed to have their pricing adjusted.
Stubborn was part of the character that made DA, not fearless which has been a =][= special rule.
DA termies are indeed cheaper but so are the terminators in C:SM, BA, and Chaos than their 3rd edition counter parts. In fact they got way cheaper, comperable abilities. Thats not a net improvement on the DA side.

They have a crappy rule that only allows them to attack under certain restrictions, and then it only applies to a small portion of the army. The Apocathery is a nice upgrade, and cheap but its in a unit that takes the standard which makes you want to get that unit into combat once there the Apoc is rather useless. Up until that point he can save "A" termie a turn. And when a decent opponet starts killing your units can only save so many before that squad is toast.



I guess it comes down to play style in the end, no unit is really ever useless as long as you know how to use it. Making concrete statements about a unit being useless tend to be a misconception on the part of the person making the statement. Deathwing Terminators are far from useless and are one of the best parts of the DA list for the reasons previously stated.


I have to disagree, there are no-brainer units, comperable units, and then theres useless units IE units that don't help out the army, and only create a hinderence to the over all play of an army. DA termies are out matched by BA, SM, BT, chaos, and GK termies by cheaper, and useful abilties.


Pick BT as they have pretty much everything DA has except Devistator squads.

Ruroni
11-09-2007, 05:34
eh?

it sounds like a perfectly sweet idea.

no where did he say he wanted to include the fallen with his DA army, nor did he say they'd necessarily be CC oriented. he just wants to proxy and i think it's a nice, sensible decision

He said a proxy army using the BT list. I love the fallen, we have 2 units and cypher, but do you think he meant a list made from the templar book that wasn't CC? that'd be kinda silly.

Master Bait
11-09-2007, 05:48
He said a proxy army using the BT list. I love the fallen, we have 2 units and cypher, but do you think he meant a list made from the templar book that wasn't CC? that'd be kinda silly.

its up to him dude, his army.

yeah, he's making a proxy list for the fallen using BT rules. sure it'll be more CC orientated, but essentially he's just saying these are the fallen warped and driven mad by chaos - that'll cover the zealous and CC aspects of BTs

Master Bait
11-09-2007, 05:50
blah blah blah

all your long posts and objections are pretty baseless when a quick scan over the tactica thread shows people who've had success with DW armies. they have difficulty with it, but work with it.

if you still want to be that stained about it though, i'd gladly give you my address so you can send me your terms. its not like you're going to do anything with them will you?

Ronin_eX
11-09-2007, 08:49
all your long posts and objections are pretty baseless when a quick scan over the tactica thread shows people who've had success with DW armies. they have difficulty with it, but work with it.

if you still want to be that stained about it though, i'd gladly give you my address so you can send me your terms. its not like you're going to do anything with them will you?

Meh, people tend to dislike something and stick with the assumption that they're right despite any evidence to the contrary. I find it funny when some one expunges how crappy a unit is and how useless they are while completely ignoring the comments of those who have success with them. Between the various tactica threads on Warseer and B&C you will find a lot of praise for terminators. Most people are too proud to admit that they might be using something poorly and instead of trying to improve they simply chalk it up to bad rules and give up. It is very rare for any unit in the new style codices to actually be useless and without merit. Eldar (excepting the storm squad though some people have uses for them going on to prove this point further), Dark Angel, Blood Angel and Chaos codices are based around a very solid internal unit balance in that no single choice is any worse or better than other comparable choices. There are still ways to make a poor list but it will be more about units with bad synergy rather than anything inherently wrong with any one unit. The new DA list is no exception in that it thrives on unit-synergy and combined arms tactics while doing poorly when it is played as a one-note list (not to say it is impossible though, just harder). So DW are still a good choice with a lot to give to the army and this isn't the opinion of the minority here.


Mixed weapons is cool on paper but it isn't worth its salt in a 5 man squad a couple deaths and your no longer scoring, and can't hold objectives. I'd rather pay for a drop pod, at least then they end up surviving the drop, creates cover, and an extra fire point(who wants to waste a squad's worth of shooting for an extra 25 VP?). Fearless is again cool on paper but sucks it up in CC where the extra armor saves can be death to small squads. Lets face it small squads tend to get mashed in CC which isn't where termies are the greatest.

You know how long it took to create a "broken" chaos list with the new dex? About 5 minutes which is even shorter than making a cheesy BA list, and arguably you can do that by accident.

Mixed weapons is also good in practice (I use it in practice more than on paper myself ;)). Being able to add heavy weapons to an assault squad is something all marine players have wanted to do, well we can do it now so good for us. Adding a single pair of LCs is also great for assaulting units as it gives you a lot more punch in CC for a small loss in shooting (wiped out many larger terminator squads simply by virtue of having a pair of LCs along for the ride). As for fearless being bad in CC, so was stubborn so it is really a non-issue in the end. As for CC ability I find DW assault squads to be great in hand to hand, my BT friend is afraid of charging my command squad at this point because even on bad rolls it tends to mash things.

As for the "broken" Chaos list, time will tell if that has any sort of truth to it. The codex hasn't been released to everyone at this point and isn't yet widely distributed. People have yet to play against Chaos and find out how to beat the new lists (it still has surprise on its side). Until the codex has been out longer it will take a while to find out whether the list is actually "broken" or if it simply goes the way of most net-lists (i.e. a one trick pony that is easy to shut down after you've played against it once). As for cheesy BA I really have yet to see it. One of my regular opponents is BA and I have yet to find the list freakishly imbalanced (like its previous incarnation).


You really don't see DW armies doing well in any sort of game these days. Hmm, going from DW being a decent fire-base/scoring unit to fodder isn't really a inprovement. Hmm, I've heard that argument a couple times. Heres an idea switch to a all DW army, and play someone who really wants to win. Lets see how well you do, and I don't mean play people that just started within the last 4 months. If it was just me then why don't you see too many DW armies out there? Sure, you see a few sadists who abuse themselves on this list but do you see people winning tournaments hands down? I know full well how the DW used to work theres even the fun stuff you could pull with how they used to play. Most of that is gone though some of it was abusive of the SM codex.

There's an argument I see a lot too "You don't know what I've had to go through!" Also a rather weak one at that. I've played DA for over a decade and in that time I have played pure DW or DW heavy lists exclusively. I found the 3rd edition list to be a little ham-handed in its execution after the freedom of 2nd but I still went with the limitations. Come 4th I can go back to combined arms like DA was from the beginning and that makes me happy. But I digress, I haven't been arguing that pure DW is still highly playable. In fact I've been saying that those placing artificial limitations on themselves are weakening their own potential. GW isn't holding a gun to your head saying "A Deathwing army may only contain terminators, landraiders and dreadnoughts!"

The concept of "pure" Deathwing was something made up for our horrible 3rd edition codex because they couldn't think of a way to give us our combined arms approach so instead they made us three different armies. Well their isn't any kind of distinction any more and you are free to make a list with anything in it. A pure DW list loses out on various synergies of our terminators and will be weakened for it. So to answer your challenge: I have played pure DW but I do it more for fun than winning, if I want to win with the DA I play the army like it was meant to be played and I don't limit myself because a crappy codex for a poorly written edition that paid no heed to any of the previous background told me how I need to field an army with lots of terminators in it. So thanks I've already tried and I found it tough but not insurmountable, you just need to play carefully and can't pretend a terminator is invincible (many delude themselves about this and it is how most are lost in the first place).


I expect them to play as a really elite army that must avoid lots of multi-shot enemies until I can kill those units. They should be able to hold a table quarter, or objective without half the army backing them up. I played at the end of second, and third is where I got my pratice with this army. The big difference is now the units are smaller(die quicker, and loose scoring status), loss of fire power, can't survive witout half the army backing them up. I'm not saying you just drop the squad, and run but you shouldn't ever devot 700 some odd points to ensure a 250pt unit's survival.

DW armies used to play more like a pure GK Daemon hunters list. Same problem no heavy weapons except the ones on the dreads.

Hmm it sounds like you want the 2nd edition incarnation of the DW. Too bad terminators were unbalanced in comparison to other choices (they were nerfed for a good reason). I think the current rendition is the best balance they've been at for a while. They can't march across open terrain with no worries anymore but it is tough to take them down nonetheless. Also no one ever said that 700 points is devoted to keeping them alive, but the entire army does work together to achieve goals. If they need to keep an objective that will win the game then 700 points is a small price to pay for victory. I've never played with a unit of terminators bigger than 5 (not even in 3rd) and none of my squads have ever carried more than one assault cannon and even at 52 points a pop with no invulnerable save I won more than I lost (against Eldar to boot). The current incarnation of DW is a big step forward from that trash.


Gratz to you on finding a spot for them in your army but I haven't which puts my little guys sitting on a shelf. And I have such fond memories of plopping down a small army, and calling done. With the rules changes from 3rd to 4th some of those weapons really needed to have their pricing adjusted.
Stubborn was part of the character that made DA, not fearless which has been a =][= special rule.
DA termies are indeed cheaper but so are the terminators in C:SM, BA, and Chaos than their 3rd edition counter parts. In fact they got way cheaper, comperable abilities. Thats not a net improvement on the DA side.

They have a crappy rule that only allows them to attack under certain restrictions, and then it only applies to a small portion of the army. The Apocathery is a nice upgrade, and cheap but its in a unit that takes the standard which makes you want to get that unit into combat once there the Apoc is rather useless. Up until that point he can save "A" termie a turn. And when a decent opponent starts killing your units can only save so many before that squad is toast.


The part about fearless is hilarious. Guess what differentiated DW from normal terminators in 2nd edition? They were immune to psychology. Guess what other terminator unit had that? Grey Knights! DW being fearless in battle is some of the oldest fluff about the DA chapter. Stubborn and Intractable were simply things that GW created for the sake of pointless difference. DA have never been described as inflexible in any way prior to that but apparently come 3rd my marines would randomly stand still and my terminators were fearless except when snipers were involved, then they would put their heads down and pray. The majority of the 3rd edition rules were far from the established fluff of the chapter (even stuff already in the book) and sometimes I think the only reason intractable was included was because the BA got black rage (OMG it's like their opposites CREATIVE*10). Fearless and well coordinated teleport assault have been DW traits since day one, stubborn has nothing on that.

Again we see the apparent hate for DWA. I fail to see how half rounded up is a "small portion of the army" when it is quite directly half rounded up. Take an uneven amount and the majority of your DW drop on the first turn (I find 3 squads is great for this, or if you use three squads then you can keep one grounded and in a LR while two drop in leaving only one in reserve). DWA is one of those rules that takes some thought as when to use and when not to. But when you do use it it means you know that you will be getting terminators where you want them without having to wait for reinforcements possibly bringing them in one at a time so they are hacked apart piecemeal. It is a rule with so many uses it deserves its own bloody tactica thread just to start getting into it. Saying it is useless simply makes me think you're doing something wrong because even if not used it is still a great special rule.

And for the Apoth upgrade at least I agree with you there, it is a great upgrade. But who forced you to always take a banner with it? Certainly I myself use the Apothecary in an assault squad with the banner (great for soaking up casualties on the way to the fight and can be used to heal others within 6") but it is viable to make a shooty squad with just the apothecary in it (cheaper to) and just not take the banner. This seems to be a fallacy of "they have the option they need to take it" which is simply creating a false dilemma where none exist. The fact that you can take a banner doesn't make the apothecary less useful just as the reverse isn't true.

And saying it only saves one termy a turn is well... your point? A cheap upgrade saves a 40+ point model from death. It's better than letting it die and if you're smart and using cover to limit incoming fire your squad will likely be taking only one casualty a turn and doing just fine. If you don't like only saving one wound then why not add a Librarian and use force shield to soak up another (and it works on insta-kill weapons to boot)? Or make a cheap command squad to follow them around and act as a healing/counter-charge unit. In short we get an apothecary for our terminators, it is a great upgrade and any attempt to downplay it is simply sour grapes.


I have to disagree, there are no-brainer units, comperable units, and then theres useless units IE units that don't help out the army, and only create a hinderence to the over all play of an army. DA termies are out matched by BA, SM, BT, chaos, and GK termies by cheaper, and useful abilties.


Pick BT as they have pretty much everything DA has except Devistator squads.

Show me a single no-brainer unit, really I am intrigues as all your other assumptions have been rather amusing and I'd love to see what you consider to be no-brainer choices in the current list. Stating something as a fact and then not backing it up tends to make an argument rather weak.

That said I certainly contest BA terminators being better than DW (as they have no special abilities at all and have all the same limitations) as that seems to have no grounding in reality. As for Chaos their terminators are certainly good but when fully upgraded they are a fair chunk more expensive than a DW squad and the fact that they can take 3 units of 10 while DA can take 9 units of 5 seems to indicate that just because their squad can be bigger doesn't mean it is actually better (9 DA squads can carry more firepower than 3 Chaos squads and they can split fire for effectiveness) as in the end they have less squads that can't split their fire despite numerical superiority per squad. As to the older style of terminators, it may be true as they are easy to min-max and the best weapon they can carry is cheaper than that of the DW, but I haven't seen much difference myself and I can still massacre their terminators just like anyone else's. In any case it seems a rather immaterial point as all marine armies will be going to the BA format terminators instead of the current version (or so the trend in loyalist armies suggests as well as SM redux rumours).

kazkal
11-09-2007, 09:31
Green Templars :p so you can use em as either har.

kazkal
11-09-2007, 10:30
i would go with dark angels just because a templar army fixes on close combat but lacks long range weapons


Being that I also play Tau,plus Imperial guard this is exactly what I wanted when I picked Black Templar lol....My next force I wanna try find something inbetween eh.

TwilightOdyssey
11-09-2007, 14:05
Sorry, I thought that my post last night was clear enough, but to make it crystal clear:

Yes, I am going to be using the BT list to make an army of the Fallen led by Cypher. I am also going to build an army using the DA codex. Yes, it will be close combat oriented. Yes, I am aware that the Fallen and DA would not ally themselves together. :)

Ronin_eX
11-09-2007, 22:40
Sounds good I think. Though you might think about adding some kind of Guard (traitor or otherwise) to the fallen force as they are well known as manipulators and meddlers. I hope you have fun building them both.

Master Bait
11-09-2007, 22:54
Meh, people tend to dislike something and stick with the assumption that they're right despite any evidence to the contrary. I find it funny when some one expunges how crappy a unit is and how useless they are while completely ignoring the comments of those who have success with them. Between the various tactica threads on Warseer and B&C you will find a lot of praise for terminators. Most people are too proud to admit that they might be using something poorly and instead of trying to improve they simply chalk it up to bad rules and give up.

of course, its totally irrational thinking and made all the more ridiculous when applied to the context of what is simply a game.

i'm still waiting on my package of free terms though, come on chop-chop

Chaplain Ark
11-09-2007, 22:57
ok sorry Hive Fleet, but, if you ask any GW worker, your not allowed to bring a printed rule book to play. i merly suggest looking at the codexs to try to fnd which one you would desire more. then go out any buy that codex. i never meant to try to cheat GW. its the same as going to a GW, looking at both codexs and decided there, mine way just saves the trip and allows you more time to examine the two codexs.