Blood Angels in 6th Edition

[Tynskel]

I play 6th edition 40k. Playing 6th Ed. missions involves capturing a lot of objectives. Troop choices are the only units that are guaranteed to be able to score objectives. If objectives are the primary source of victory points and only troop choices are guaranteed to be able to capture objectives, then taking troop choices is essential to securing necessary victory points. Therefore 6th Ed. requires large numbers of troop choices.

TL;DR - I play 6th Ed 40k the way the rulebook lays it out to be played.

This is exactly what I am trying to talk about. Close minded, single thought thinking.
Must play to objectives!

No. There are many possibilities to win (aka, getting those objectives). You should make a list that is flexible and makes you think.

This is why lists that are only death company troops can and do win.


If you recall, the majority of 'Ard Boyz games were objectives based... yet I won with my limited troops...

Design army first. Not with objectives/kill points/whatever in mind, but with how does the army work together. Do the units fit together like puzzle pieces?

[Tynskel]

The minimal troop thing is a 5th edition trick. Although it was never a particularly effective one for the BA, the Tau, for example, employed it frequently and simply went for tabling.

I simply do not believe your stories of success in 6th edition using your scheme, unless it is for the reasons I stated above. Your statement about who knows how to play marines is demonstrably false. We have several very good, tournament winning marine players where I play that use a variety of body counts.

BTW, the more you use lol and bwahahahaah, the less credible you seem. At least to me.

Bwahahahahah!
The minimal troop thing has been a trick since 2nd Edition. It is called, conserving your troops.

I have told you, I have used large body counts before. You have not used 12 Marines before.
Try it.

Because you are having trouble, here's a hint. It is almost impossible to shoot 12 marines. Especially in 6th Edition!

Again, it makes me think about your statements about 'peak' blood angels. You really do not understand the game if you think that was the 'peak'. Just because Rhino Rush was cheap and easy, does not mean that it was good. There were ways to break that, and those armies blew chunks once the rush was broken. That is not a 'peak'. That is called a crutch.

[Martel732]

I play 6th edition 40k. Playing 6th Ed. missions involves capturing a lot of objectives. Troop choices are the only units that are guaranteed to be able to score objectives. If objectives are the primary source of victory points and only troop choices are guaranteed to be able to capture objectives, then taking troop choices is essential to securing necessary victory points. Therefore 6th Ed. requires large numbers of troop choices.

TL;DR - I play 6th Ed 40k the way the rulebook lays it out to be played.

The only other plan in 6th is to table people. I think that's kind of a poor plan given how many bodies people are taking for the exact reasons you state.

I think Tynskel's just trolling at this point, because his posts are complete nonsense. He offers no specifics other than "12 marines" without elaborating on how this is supposed to work in 6th or even 5th edition. He continually makes bad assumptions, like the unlimited availability of LOS blocking terrain. 12 marines are in no way impossible to shoot in 6th edition with a standard board. Just ignore him.

[Warpspider89]

This is exactly what I am trying to talk about. Close minded, single thought thinking.
Must play to objectives!

No. There are many possibilities to win (aka, getting those objectives). You should make a list that is flexible and makes you think.

This is why lists that are only death company troops can and do win.


If you recall, the majority of 'Ard Boyz games were objectives based... yet I won with my limited troops...

Design army first. Not with objectives/kill points/whatever in mind, but with how does the army work together. Do the units fit together like puzzle pieces?

It would be illogical to attempt to design an army that is made to "work together" without considering the goal that that army is intended to accomplish since they would not have anything to work together towards without specific goal in mind.

[Martel732]

The only other plan is tabling your opponent. I don't know why he just doesn't say it. I guess one could try for first blood and warlord and then deny all objectives, but this seems silly.

This also completely begs the question that even if the "12 marine" thing worked, the other meq lists could likely do it better anyway. It does not address the problems of BA in 6th edition.

Okay I guess he did mention table wipe in one of his rambling posts. So the plan is to take minimal troops and go for table wipes with BA? That's a Tau tactic from 5th edition.

[Warpspider89]

Stealing the secondaries while denying is more of an Eldar strategy anyways, not a marine strategy, and it only works well on some missions.

[Martel732]

That's because the Eldar have some putrid troops for the 6th edition environment. They need a codex pretty badly. I mean the guardian jetbikes are good, but they cost mass real $$.

[Warpspider89]

Same goes for Wraithguard... but we are getting off topic haha.

If you can take good troops, which blood angels can, in an objective heavy environment where troops are what score, then for goodness sakes take troops!

[Tynskel]

The only other plan in 6th is to table people. I think that's kind of a poor plan given how many bodies people are taking for the exact reasons you state.

I think Tynskel's just trolling at this point, because his posts are complete nonsense. He offers no specifics other than "12 marines" without elaborating on how this is supposed to work in 6th or even 5th edition. He continually makes bad assumptions, like the unlimited availability of LOS blocking terrain. 12 marines are in no way impossible to shoot in 6th edition with a standard board. Just ignore him.

uh...
you know
you can bring your own LoS blocking terrain... that moves...


Again, this pointing to the fact that your unwillingness to think outside the box is why you fail at using Blood Angels. Commander Dante is the most brilliant strategist in the Galaxy in 40k. I suggest read about his battles. You'll note that he changes tactics all the time.

What I find even more hilarious is the assumption of denial, divide n' conquer, speed are 'Eldar' tactics. No, they are not. They are just tactics. Space Marines will do whatever it takes to win.

I love this!
Using least 'X' is like 'Y'! Good ones guys. That's a great argument for not trying a unique tactic.



And, no. Designing your force should be only about how they work together. The objectives change so much in 40k, that you cannot rely on 'playing to the object' in list design. You don't even have control of how many objectives or where they are on the board. So, designing your army with objectives in mind is silly.

[Warpspider89]

Landraiders can be badass like that lol