# Blood Angels snippet



## admiraldick (Sep 9, 2008)

i have it on good authority (thought the authority doesn't know that he's my authority), that BA will be seeing a codex and it will be after Space Wolves some time.

also, all characters in the book will have the Heroic Intervention special rule to emphasise the close combat abilities of the BA.

make of it what you will. i'm not very confident of it, but as i heard it and hadn't seen it else where i thought i'd pass it on.


----------



## Spot The Grot (Jul 15, 2008)

Its very nice to know that GW do have on their to do list and thats its gonna be soon.And by the sound of things they're gonna get more rules to reflect their CC prowess.


----------



## nightfish (Feb 16, 2009)

Well when they released the codex in WD, they did say it would get a proper book.


----------



## Lord Khorne (May 6, 2008)

Yeah, that would be cool. Personally I think they should do a chapter codex with templars, BA, SW ect all in one.


----------



## slaaneshy (Feb 20, 2008)

Mmm, this rumour doesn't say much - the BA will get a codex some time. So will everyone!


----------



## Dead4XxX (Jun 29, 2008)

Blood Angels arent a CC Orientated army, we can still give out decent amounts of shooty goodness aswell. The key abilities that seem to be stressed in Blood Angels armys is high mobility, as i can easily field a list where all of the units i field will be able to move more than 6 inches. 

But alas, this isnt a thread about the Blood Angels tactics per se, but still i am glad that they are going to make a new Codex, hopefully with some fluff!

the only bad thing is that ill have to pay for it...sigh.


----------



## Stella Cadente (Dec 25, 2006)

slaaneshy said:


> So will everyone!


squats won't


----------



## Wolf_Lord_Skoll (Jun 9, 2008)

Dead4XxX said:


> Blood Angels arent a CC Orientated army, we can still give out decent amounts of shooty goodness aswell. The key abilities that seem to be stressed in Blood Angels armys is high mobility, as i can easily field a list where all of the units i field will be able to move more than 6 inches.


But Blood Angels *are* a CC _orientated_ army. So are Black Templars and Space Wolves. This doesn't mean they don't shoot, it means they would rather hack the enemy to death up close and personal.


----------



## slaaneshy (Feb 20, 2008)

Stella Cadente said:


> squats won't


Thats because they are long eaten by Nids!


----------



## Katie Drake (Nov 28, 2007)

Wolf_Lord_Skoll said:


> But Blood Angels *are* a CC _orientated_ army. So are Black Templars and Space Wolves. This doesn't mean they don't shoot, it means they would rather hack the enemy to death up close and personal.


No, Blood Angels are a Codex Chapter with one squad per army of raving lunatics that like to charge into close combat. Other than that, the Angels just tend to prefer fighting up close. They're definitely not an assault army like the Templars though.

Well hopefully this means we'll see Blood Angels some time next year. Ever since 5th came out my Flesh Tearers have been sitting on the shelf. I just can't stand the White Dwarf list.


----------



## khorneflake (Jul 11, 2008)

man this is Bullsh*t. they need to work on other codices, like necrons, or dark eldar. the Space marines are poster boys for GW and for that reason, and that reason only, are all of the different armies getting codices.work on CD, or maybe even Tau, their doing a bit better now, but its a little broken.

//rant over//


----------



## Dead4XxX (Jun 29, 2008)

There are alot of factors that do make BA seem like a CC orientated army, i dont deny that, im just saying that they are not a _*pure*_ assault army, i like my jump pack VAS with Meltas, complimented by the raving lunatics 

oh, who am i kidding, ill just come clean and admit i LOVE wiping out my Shooty friend in the assault phase with my crazy, blood drinking pshyco maniac assault squads.

But really, maybe GW should focus on making codices for other armies, as khorneflake has just said... Dark Elder are still in 2nd edition... i think.


----------



## Katie Drake (Nov 28, 2007)

Dead4XxX said:


> But really, maybe GW should focus on making codices for other armies, as khorneflake has just said... Dark Elder are still in 2nd edition... i think.


No, that Codex was written in 3rd - they made a second edition of the Dark Eldar and Dark Angel books because they were such failures the first time around. Too bad GW doesn't still do that, I imagine the Inquisition would greatly appreciate such a gesture.

As for other armies deserving a Codex more... well, blah blah.  It's true that other races like the Necrons and Dark Eldar need an update more, but that doesn't mean that the Blood/Dark Angels don't still need one. I for one am happy if they continue on their pattern of Marines, Something Else, Marines, Something Else and so on.


----------



## Nemesis-The-Warlock (Jun 10, 2008)

I don't doubt that BA will get a codex somewhere along the lines, 
but it's not going to happen anywhere near a SW release that is coming so soon after a space marine release


----------



## spidie2000 (Nov 21, 2008)

Katie Drake said:


> No, Blood Angels are a Codex Chapter with one squad per army of raving lunatics that like to charge into close combat. Other than that, the Angels just tend to prefer fighting up close. They're definitely not an assault army like the Templars though.
> 
> Well hopefully this means we'll see Blood Angels some time next year. Ever since 5th came out my Flesh Tearers have been sitting on the shelf. I just can't stand the White Dwarf list.


Well Katie, they are still more of a CC army than a normal chapter. We have assault marines as a troop choice. If you are fighting me you will hardly ever see a tactical squad on the ground. 

Giving us assault marines as troop choice and moving the scouts to the elite category I think definatly geared us towards being a CC army.


----------



## Lord Reevan (May 1, 2008)

I have heard this a few times too. From an elite store near enough to me the manager said there has been talk of a few new releases with the book. Like new multi option honour guard, upgrade kits a la templars and maybe a genereic jump pack HQ model... Sounds lie kit won't be for ages but still I can dream sure =)


----------



## inquisitoryorei (Nov 25, 2007)

Lord Khorne said:


> Yeah, that would be cool. Personally I think they should do a chapter codex with templars, BA, SW ect all in one.


That would be cool. However, i got an email recently from the very helpful customer support stating that a new codex doesnt look to be coming in the near future. but, possibly another FAQ........yippee:shok:


----------



## inquisitoryorei (Nov 25, 2007)

Katie Drake said:


> No, Blood Angels are a Codex Chapter with one squad per army of raving lunatics that like to charge into close combat. Other than that, the Angels just tend to prefer fighting up close. They're definitely not an assault army like the Templars though.
> 
> Well hopefully this means we'll see Blood Angels some time next year. Ever since 5th came out my Flesh Tearers have been sitting on the shelf. I just can't stand the White Dwarf list.


if BA are not CC oriented, why do assault marines (with jump packs (for getting into CC quicker) ) count as TROOPS?

I have been playing BA for 6 years. always assault heavy with predator backup for killing vehicles. works awesome for me.

(why does everyone have to go against the fluff?!?!?!?)


----------



## inquisitoryorei (Nov 25, 2007)

khorneflake said:


> man this is Bullsh*t. they need to work on other codices, like necrons, or dark eldar. the Space marines are poster boys for GW and for that reason, and that reason only, are all of the different armies getting codices.work on CD, or maybe even Tau, their doing a bit better now, but its a little broken.
> 
> //rant over//


ummmm.........you play CSM right? so.........what the hell are ya bitchin fer? yeah it would be nice if the "lesser played" armies were focused on more, but i think GW does new codices by what the players are asking a lot of questiond about.

however, i would like to state (yet again) that this would not be an issue if GW put out all the codices for the current rules edition before putting out a new edition!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## inquisitoryorei (Nov 25, 2007)

Lord Khorne said:


> Yeah, that would be cool. Personally I think they should do a chapter codex with templars, BA, SW ect all in one.


That would be cool. However, i got an email recently from the very helpful customer support stating that a new codex doesnt look to be coming in the near future. but, possibly another FAQ........yippee:shok:


----------



## inquisitoryorei (Nov 25, 2007)

oooooooookkkkkkkkkkkay i went a liiiiittle crazy there. sorry guys.


----------



## Wachaza (Mar 20, 2008)

Near future=9/10 months.

inquisitoryorei- can you see the edit button?


----------



## TheKingElessar (Mar 31, 2009)

Wachaza said:


> Near future=9/10 months.
> 
> inquisitoryorei- can you see the edit button?


:laugh::laugh::laugh:

Well put! 

I'm afraid I don't see the Blood Angels being a priority for them to start a new codex, I think it'll be new fluff, and the current one, possibly plus Sternguard and with costs and options tweaked. Unless I'm mistaken (and I suppose it's possible ) they are giving away the Codex for free online at the minute, so they'll want to put an end to that, but they ARE aware of the more pressing need for some other races to be redone.


----------



## Dead4XxX (Jun 29, 2008)

The fact that Assault Squads are TROOPS doesnt make BA a "purely" assault army, Katie has said before they are similiar to Nilla just that we have more options to gear towards CC and Mobility, seeing as how almost my entire list has jump packs and my vehicles have OCE.

And unlike a pure CC army like BT for example, i can still even operate a pretty scary gunline if the need be.


----------



## spidie2000 (Nov 21, 2008)

nobody is saying we are a pure assault army, but you can't argue the fact that we are better geared for CC than a normal SM chapter.


----------



## Dead4XxX (Jun 29, 2008)

well...you were saying that were more of a CC army, and inquisitor is saying that we are a pure assault army just because we have assault squads as troops...

Im just saying


----------



## admiraldick (Sep 9, 2008)

putting aside innane arguments about whether the BA are more assualt focused than Ultramarines, i was actually given a more specific time slot for the apparent release of the codex. he actually stated that it would be immediately after SW. i guess the idea would be that its quite similar to the other codexes and a lot of the ground work has already been covered by PDF rules, so it would really just be an issue of combining the two and tidying the result up. nevertheless it sounded so ridiculous that i didn't bother posting it.

my friend can be quite hit and miss sometimes, he gave me specifics about Planet Strike (the re-arrangement of the FOC, the weapons batteries and so on), War of the Ring (he was more sketchy on because he couldn't care less) and Space Hulk months and months ago. but then, he also told me that the DE would be getting a WD codex similar to BA whilst they worked on them.

so i'll leave it in your hands, i'm just passing it on.


----------



## inquisitoryorei (Nov 25, 2007)

1. i will use edit from now on....when i deem i need to (now is not one of those times)

2. never said "purely" CC


----------



## Death Shroud (Mar 1, 2008)

Lord Khorne said:


> Yeah, that would be cool. Personally I think they should do a chapter codex with templars, BA, SW ect all in one.


Nah seperate codexes are much better.
1- Armies can be more distinct and varied.
2- More background and art. 
3- More time devoted to legion specific model design and production.
4- More playtesting time per army.

Sure you'd save money if you are the type of person who has to have every codex (like me) but that is the only advantage, the disadvantages of a single codex far outweigh the advantages.


----------



## JokerGod (Jan 21, 2009)

If GW makes the stupid mistake of putting out two SM codex books out back to back they will see a lot of flak from the people waiting in line for there turn, and it would be a marketing disaster. Every time a new Codex comes out you see an influx of people playing that army and buying the models, if GW was to put out two books of the same army in a row they would lose that jump in sales that they would get for putting out two separate armys.

And no, BA and SW are not two separate armys, there the same thing as all the other Space marines with one or two different shinny bits.

Not saying there wont be one, just that there is no way GW would make the mistake of putting it out right after Space Wolves.


----------



## chaplin_magnus (Oct 1, 2007)

i think that the blood angels are just world eaters who havent found the truth yet. because in every BA is a WE trying to get out!!:biggrin:

but on another note i think that there are a lot of races getting screwed. they are long over do on fixing things, but they are GW and they will do thing their way. unfortunitly for them if they dont fix thing soon i see alot of people going to other systems who have there shit together.
only time will tell.


----------



## Nemesis-The-Warlock (Jun 10, 2008)

one way I can see this happening is if the codex gets released with very little model support - ie just a few heroes and maybe a new death company,

if they were going to release marine armies in this manner it could speed release rates up a little and let them get the marine codexes, codecies, codi :shok:, whatever released in a faster/ easier manner, 

letting them spend more time on the other armies.

just a thought........


----------



## Syph (Aug 3, 2008)

If GW do decide to make/finish a mini BA Codex and release it after SW, that's exactly what they'll do. I think a BA release near to SW wouldn't be so bad in all honesty, especially as it wouldn't be a ground-up Codex like DE, Necrons etc. Let's face it, anyone who has any of the old Codicies or Army Books will see just how much copy > paste action we see - some of the fluff in the new SM Codex is exactly the same as in the Ultramarine Codex I own from 2nd Ed (that's 14 years old btw!)

I am alone in thinking if they could get it out quick enough, to have the BA's ready for Planetstrike? Increased Elite and FA choices? Sounds perfect.


----------



## Wachaza (Mar 20, 2008)

JokerGod said:


> Not saying there wont be one, just that there is no way GW would make the mistake of putting it out right after Space Wolves.


If they think it'll amke money they'll do it. If it fits with another release like Space Hulk or Planetstrike to boost sales they'll do it even faster. 

Marines sell. Marine codexes amd minis are easy to do. Aliens need work from the ground up which takes time and there's always the risk they'll bomb. Dark Eldar and Vespid did not sell well.


----------



## Nemesis-The-Warlock (Jun 10, 2008)

Wachaza said:


> Aliens need work from the ground up which takes time and there's always the risk they'll bomb. Dark Eldar and Vespid did not sell well.


er, sorry?

the risk they'll bomb?

dark eldar aren't selling well, at least partially as they are very old models,
and vespid are part of the tau.

are you new to warhammer perchance?


----------



## Wachaza (Mar 20, 2008)

No. I'm not. There is a risk they will bomb-not sell.

Dark Eldar were very poor sellers from teh day they were in the 3rd edition box. The lack of background iin both versions of the DE codex and poor models did them in. Most of the Tau stuf sold well but Vespids added in Tau Empire did not sell well. Whether that's the models or the rules working against them is open for debate. Any rework of xenos codexes always takes that risk.

Marines are a sure seller in wahtever varaint they come in. The new minis need minimal design work as most of it is already done and pretty much set in stone.


----------



## inquisitoryorei (Nov 25, 2007)

JokerGod said:


> If GW makes the stupid mistake of putting out two SM codex books out back to back they will see a lot of flak from the people waiting in line for there turn, and it would be a marketing disaster. Every time a new Codex comes out you see an influx of people playing that army and buying the models, if GW was to put out two books of the same army in a row they would lose that jump in sales that they would get for putting out two separate armys.
> 
> And no, BA and SW are not two separate armys, there the same thing as all the other Space marines with one or two different shinny bits.
> 
> Not saying there wont be one, just that there is no way GW would make the mistake of putting it out right after Space Wolves.


i actually agree (even though i play BA). GW needs to put out DE Necrons and other codices(proper english spelling i guess) first.


----------



## Nemesis-The-Warlock (Jun 10, 2008)

Wachaza said:


> No. I'm not. There is a risk they will bomb-not sell.
> 
> Dark Eldar were very poor sellers from teh day they were in the 3rd edition box. The lack of background iin both versions of the DE codex and poor models did them in. Most of the Tau stuf sold well but Vespids added in Tau Empire did not sell well. Whether that's the models or the rules working against them is open for debate. Any rework of xenos codexes always takes that risk.


firstly DE have never been top sellers and no one is disputing that,
but saying they were very poor sellers is a complete load of hotspur.

Secondly saying vespids did not sell well in comparison to an army is a steaming load of tottenham

comparing a set of models (vespids) which are just one part of an army to an army makes no sense at all :wacko:

it's like comparing a bus to a wheel


----------



## Wachaza (Mar 20, 2008)

Eh?

The fact that DE were poor sellers and have remaind so is part of the reason for GW taking their time over new Xenos releases. Why do another Xenos release which doesn't pay for itself over three editions of the game? 

Vespid were the last new Xenos type released and have had poor sales. GW aren't falling over themselves to do new Xenos. They've been bitten in the ass too many times on Xenos which noone buys. Eldar didn't set the world alight. 

They'll take their time over the Necrons and Nids, just like they did with the Orks. Marines generate sales and can be churned out. Xenos don't get revisted often enough to risk another debacle like DE. They have to get the models and rules right.


----------



## Nemesis-The-Warlock (Jun 10, 2008)

Wachaza said:


> Eh?
> 
> The fact that DE were poor sellers and have remaind so is part of the reason for GW taking their time over new Xenos releases


erm, no



Wachaza said:


> Why do another Xenos release which doesn't pay for itself over three editions of the game?


because they have numerous armies to do



Wachaza said:


> Vespid were the last new Xenos type released and have had poor sales.


if you are saying they didn't sell as well as any other army (which, remember they aren't) then yes, 
otherwise you are just making things up



Wachaza said:


> They'll take their time over the Necrons and Nids, just like they did with the Orks.


for one example it sounds like the nids are coming again soon and there have already been a few releases of the nids codex, 

this on it's own would blow your theory out of the water, even if there wasn't a new codex being prepared



Wachaza said:


> Xenos don't get revisted often enough to risk another debacle like DE


if you actually believe this then I can only assume that you play 40k in a closet with imaginary friends, 
or you are in fact in a parallel universe to this reality


----------



## Katie Drake (Nov 28, 2007)

Nemesis-The-Warlock said:


> Lots of rude bullshit.


Hey buddy, cool it. It's fine to disagree with someone's statements, but you don't need to be a jerk about it. I think Wachaza has a few good points.


----------



## Master Kashnizel (Jan 5, 2008)

Nemesis-The-Warlock said:


> if you actually believe this then I can only assume that you play 40k in a closet with imaginary friends,
> or you are in fact in a parallel universe to this reality


 That's a nice thing to say to someone who hasn't been rude to you and has just been discussing his point of view with you. As Katie said, it's fine to disagree, but seriously don't be a jerk about it.


----------



## Broken Sword (Jan 5, 2009)

I don't play BA, but just inherited some BA models and I can't help but wonder what is wrong with the codex that GW released through WD that is currently downloadable through the FAQs on their site? I am asking because I have these models and I am not sure whether to play them by that codex or not.


----------



## inquisitoryorei (Nov 25, 2007)

therer isnt really anything wrong with them. it is just that some of the stuff needs to be tweaked for fifth ed. check out the codex on GWs website carefully and you might see what i mean.


----------



## JokerGod (Jan 21, 2009)

Broken Sword said:


> I don't play BA, but just inherited some BA models and I can't help but wonder what is wrong with the codex that GW released through WD that is currently downloadable through the FAQs on their site? I am asking because I have these models and I am not sure whether to play them by that codex or not.


There is nothing wrong wit hit. people just want another Codex for SMs because there not happy with the 3 they have now.


----------



## Locust (Dec 26, 2008)

JokerGod said:


> There is nothing wrong wit hit. people just want another Codex for SMs because there not happy with the 3 they have now.


I think that it's got more to do with the fact that everyone wants to have a fully illustrated, fleshed out book, instead of a PDF download. There's something about actually having a published book in your hand over a printed out copy of from an online source. I play Blood Angels and there's really nothing wrong with the Codex as it is. Sure some tweeks would be nice, but it's perfectly playable. Now would I rather have a published, actual Codex book in my greedy little fists? You betcha!

Anyway, on another note I do know for a fact that GW has been sitting on some new Blood Angels models since 2005. If you look in their How to Paint Space Marines book, there is a picture of a Blood Angels Honor Guard. Don't know what page, as I don't have the book. But I asked a GW employee at GD Atlanta in 2005 about it and was told he "couldn't talk about it, save that there were plans to put out new models for the Blood Angels in the future." So it doesn't seem that farfetched that they would release Blood Angels after Space Wolves.


----------



## Katie Drake (Nov 28, 2007)

JokerGod said:


> There is nothing wrong wit hit. people just want another Codex for SMs because there not happy with the 3 they have now.


And we're unhappy with it because those of us that play using the Blood Angel rules got completely screwed when 5th came along. The new rules for the BA worked fine in 4th, but suffer pretty badly in 5th. There's also the issue of everybody's wargear and such being outdated since they changed so much in Codex: Space Marines.


----------



## TheKingElessar (Mar 31, 2009)

Katie Drake said:


> And we're unhappy with it because those of us that play using the Blood Angel rules got completely screwed when 5th came along. The new rules for the BA worked fine in 4th, but suffer pretty badly in 5th. There's also the issue of everybody's wargear and such being outdated since they changed so much in Codex: Space Marines.



Don't forget the overpriced vehicles, flamers and heavy weapons for Tactical squads. Do BA apothecaries still use the old rules?


----------



## JokerGod (Jan 21, 2009)

Katie Drake said:


> And we're unhappy with it because those of us that play using the Blood Angel rules got completely screwed when 5th came along. The new rules for the BA worked fine in 4th, but suffer pretty badly in 5th. There's also the issue of everybody's wargear and such being outdated since they changed so much in Codex: Space Marines.


And as with SW and DA it should be fixed with a simple FAQ saying "Refer to Codex Space marines" 

Because every time a new SM book comes out we will here the same shit, "O this book as cheaper wargear" "Well this book has new rules and its not fair" "Well my book doesn't have the new tank, I should get the update before any other army!"

Having 3 books of the same army is a bad idea from the start, unless you put out new books for all 3 at the same time it will never work. And as far as the "Not working out in 5th" line, get in line, your behind Necrons, Nids, Dark Eldar, Daemonhunter and Witchhunters and Tau, we all have the same shit that is outdated and worthless now, its all part of the cycle.


----------



## TheKingElessar (Mar 31, 2009)

Tau are fine. DE would be fine if the models were of acceptable quality - you get a stupid amount of Lances, and they're BS4 unlike regular Eldar. Okay, only one type of list may be competitive for each, so what? Neither BA nor DA have a truly competitive list available, and both DH and WH are perfectly competitive because most players simply don't have a clue what they're capable of! Nids and Necrons I can't really speak for the competitiveness of, but we already know Necrons have been started on, and Nids were fairly recent for that list you gave. Why not add Daemons if you're just gonig to gripe about poor non-SM lists?

Oh, and giving Preferred Enemy to a large Infiltrating squad of Rending Attacks hardly seems worthless to me.


----------



## JokerGod (Jan 21, 2009)

TheKingElessar said:


> Tau are fine. DE would be fine if the models were of acceptable quality - you get a stupid amount of Lances, and they're BS4 unlike regular Eldar. Okay, only one type of list may be competitive for each, so what? Neither BA nor DA have a truly competitive list available, and both DH and WH are perfectly competitive because most players simply don't have a clue what they're capable of! Nids and Necrons I can't really speak for the competitiveness of, but we already know Necrons have been started on, and Nids were fairly recent for that list you gave. Why not add Daemons if you're just gonig to gripe about poor non-SM lists?
> 
> Oh, and giving Preferred Enemy to a large Infiltrating squad of Rending Attacks hardly seems worthless to me.


You sir clearly have no idea what I was talking about. Its not about who is "competitive" its about who is up to date with 5th. And I hate to brake it to you but DE, DH, WH and Necrons are far from competitive, and I haven't seen any Tau on the list for a long time, how ever I have seen BA wal kaway with more then a few top 5 wins. 

All armys shoudl be brought up to 5th BEFORE GW makes another SM codex. And just because you change the name to BA, SW or BT dos not make it something other then a new SM codex.


----------



## Katie Drake (Nov 28, 2007)

JokerGod said:


> All armys shoudl be brought up to 5th BEFORE GW makes another SM codex. And just because you change the name to BA, SW or BT dos not make it something other then a new SM codex.


That's incorrect. A new Space Marine Codex is just that - a new Codex that goes by the name Codex: Space Marines. Anything other than that like Space Wolves, Templars, Dark Angels or whatever is an entirely different army, because none of the rules printed in these alternate books apply to the units in Codex: Space Marines. Why? 'Cause they're a different army and are supposed to have advantages and disadvantages when compared to their brethren from other books.

And don't bother coming back witih the, "Well your outdated rules are the Blood Angel's disadvantages!", because you know full well that as soon as it's the Angels' turn, they'll have their wargear and such repriced and the rules re-written to bring them up to date.


----------



## CommissarHorn (Apr 14, 2008)

Katie Drake said:


> That's incorrect. A new Space Marine Codex is just that - a new Codex that goes by the name Codex: Space Marines. Anything other than that like Space Wolves, Templars, Dark Angels or whatever is an entirely different army, because none of the rules printed in these alternate books apply to the units in Codex: Space Marines. Why? 'Cause they're a different army and are supposed to have advantages and disadvantages when compared to their brethren from other books.


Nah I'd say your incorrect aswell. They're not different books, they're supplements to the space marine codex. Instead of putting all the rules of the chapters into one codex, they made separate 'special rule' supplement codex things that 'supplement' the big main one; Codex: Space Marines. You can't have a supplement codex without the big main one; Codex Space Marines, well you can but without the big main one; Codex Space Marines, it'll be a little more difficult knowing stuff about the chapter that is explained in the big main one; Codex Space Marines. Thats why they keep asking you to refer to the big main one; Codex Space Marines, for basic rules and stuff.

You can just buy a codex but without a 40k Rule Book it'll be hard working out the main, basic rules. Same applies here.

I use the Catachan supplement Codex but I NEED the big main one; Codex Imperial Guard, for the armory, special rules and stuff.


----------



## Wachaza (Mar 20, 2008)

Nemesis-The-Warlock said:


> if you actually believe this then I can only assume that you play 40k in a closet with imaginary friends,
> or you are in fact in a parallel universe to this reality


Oh noes. I am crushed by your wit. I concede the therad to your awesum debate skills.

Seriously looka t what sells in your GW. Marines do. Very well. Xenos sell less well. Orks are doing best of the Xenos on the back of the last codex. Nids, Eldar and Tau sell realatively slowly. DE don't move at all. All the development of new Xenos codexes and new stuff for the existing is decided on the back of the sales.

The days of Andy Chambers being able to do whatever he thought was cool and being abel to get it past the accountants like Witchhunters are long gone.

One thing taht they really need to do is get some FAQs out which standardise wargear and vehicles from codex to codex. The old WArgear book done as a pdf would be good if they didn't outdate it six weeks after they published it.


----------



## admiraldick (Sep 9, 2008)

okay, and we're back in the room.

now that we've woken up from that wierd nightmare where we weren't arguing anything in particular and certainly nothing to do with the rumour, we can get back to discussing the things that we all like. the game and new stuff.

irritatingly i just had a really long conversation with my source, but i can't tell you any of it :cray:. however, what i will say, is that if they were to get new models you would probably be able to guess what they were quite quickly.


----------



## inquisitoryorei (Nov 25, 2007)

i dont think we BA player really want new models so much as maybe an errata to bring us up to speed with the new space marines.

anyone who doesnt play BA and is on here saying we dont need a new codex or that GW shouldnt spend time doing an errata, read the new C:SM and download the BA codex and read that, then tell us.

also, from my understanding, the BA that have been coming in top spots in tourneys, have been C:SM based "BA" armies. using the space marine codex because it is better set up.


----------



## bon_jovi (Nov 16, 2008)

I know there is a lot of bad feeling about new "space marines" codexs/codices I also know there is no end of bitching one way or another about wargear being up to date who has what ect. I like the way it is, i like having the seperate codexs/codices. It adds more variety to the game. So what if my Dark Angels don't have scout bikes ect, i have a bloody av14 landspeeder! To be fair, as to Blood Angels being done soon, i don't see it as another Marine codex being done. I see it as another army that needs updating in some way or another and is being updated. That can only be a good thing.


----------



## TheKingElessar (Mar 31, 2009)

JokerGod said:


> You sir clearly have no idea what I was talking about. Its not about who is "competitive" its about who is up to date with 5th. And I hate to brake it to you but DE, DH, WH and Necrons are far from competitive, and I haven't seen any Tau on the list for a long time, how ever I have seen BA wal kaway with more then a few top 5 wins.
> 
> All armys shoudl be brought up to 5th BEFORE GW makes another SM codex. And just because you change the name to BA, SW or BT dos not make it something other then a new SM codex.


Again, I'm afraid you're wrong. Firstly, precisely HOW is the ultimate anti-MEQ list uncompetitive? DE, if used properly, can also tank Horde lists with a stupidly high number of blast templates. They are eminently competitive, they just require commitment and confidence to run - they're more difficult than 'MEQs FTW!' which is what actually annoys you, not that there are more Marine lists, but that they are the best overall. Deal with it. When you boil it right down, why not just have one 'Forces of the Imperium' book, with ALL Space marines, Grey Knights, Sororitas, IG, Assassins, Custodes, whatever - Orks only get one book to represent their entire race, why not the Humans!?!?! 

Hang on...that's a stupid argument...So I suppose a chapter that uses entire armies of Terminators needs it's own...one that doesn't use a Scout company, but has over 3000 Marines needs it's own...one that has tragic berzerkers who relive their Primarch's death should have their own...one that uses a radically different system of unit and company organisation needs its own...

Otherwise how can the Inquisition justify 2 books?

PS - Maybe Tau aren't popular at the minute because of the (six?) codexes released since theirs. Again, though, you ignore the issue of Daemons, because they're an army you play. If all Marines should be together, so too all Chaos. I for one welcome the prospect of an update to the BA codex, although I reckon it'll be just that, not a new codex per se.


----------



## Bloodspeaker (Mar 15, 2008)

All of this discussions that crop time and again always saddens me and reminds how much i hate and despise the way GW handles their games it's just disgusting.

With that out of the way i want to say that at the end of the day BA is ANOTHER MARINE CODEX period no amount of different perspectives or clever arguments can change that, furthermore the problem is now becoming more apparent as time goes by and the game becomes more popular worldwide, the fact that most of GW game developers are like the imperium, racists and of course i'm refering to the W40K races is what holds the game from greatness.

Honestly what can we expect when everything in W40K is measured with marines just think about for a sec it's just not right and even though GW has created such an amazing universe their imagination has steadily decreased over the last years.
Combined with their financial problems it doesn't take a genius to realise the mess they have created.

They way i see it the only way for the game to truly improve is for GW to pour more resources at the expense of the other games (preferably LOTR) at least for a time because it is the best selling game of the 3 and most popular and the one that has suffered the most over the years.


----------



## JokerGod (Jan 21, 2009)

Katie Drake said:


> That's incorrect. A new Space Marine Codex is just that - a new Codex that goes by the name Codex: Space Marines. Anything other than that like Space Wolves, Templars, Dark Angels or whatever is an entirely different army, because none of the rules printed in these alternate books apply to the units in Codex: Space Marines. Why? 'Cause they're a different army and are supposed to have advantages and disadvantages when compared to their brethren from other books.
> 
> And don't bother coming back witih the, "Well your outdated rules are the Blood Angel's disadvantages!", because you know full well that as soon as it's the Angels' turn, they'll have their wargear and such repriced and the rules re-written to bring them up to date.


BA are not a different army, everything is basically the same, you get the same vehicles, the same units and the same wargear, yes yes I know you have one or two things that are special to you alone, and that is fine, they should have that to give the SM some difference, I ma not arguing about that, but instead of a new book all they should get is an errata saying "Refer to Codex Space Marines" for all of there war gear that is no longer up to date, when they put out a new Codex for one the old ones become out dated and every one starts to cry about it, by having the chapters linked to one central book it removes the point of them being out dated. 

Just step back and think about it, you get a new book now, and sit with it for the next 4-5 years, where the main space marines book gets a new one 2-3 years down the road, now, once again you have an outdated book that needs to be updated, however if you codex had linked rules and wargear you would have the same updated and be able to keep your special differences that every one seems to like so much. 

TheKingElessar, I had no idea I hated SMs because there so powerful. Thanks for letting me know, and here I thought I was just trying to suggest an idea that would make it better for the lesser chapters to keep there individuality with out being ignored while the main book gets there update.


----------



## TheKingElessar (Mar 31, 2009)

> at the end of the day BA is ANOTHER MARINE CODEX period no amount of different perspectives or clever arguments can change that


 Looks we'll have to agree to disagree here, as the fact that the units aren't interchangeable doesn't tie in with your assesment, but it looks like you won't be swayed. Although, again, *DAEMONS!!!!!*



> GW game developers are like the imperium, racists


 Firstly, the Imperium is Xenophobic, not racist. Secondly, what?!? How on EARTH is making the biggest range of non-human characters in any collection of table-top games either racist or xenophobic?!?!



> Honestly what can we expect when everything in W40K is measured with marines just think about for a sec it's just not right


 Space Marines are the ONLY entirely original thoughts GW have had in the 40k universe (that've ever been playable) Eldar = Elves, Orks = Orcs...Necrons = Undead, I mean, COME ON!



> even though GW has created such an amazing universe their imagination has steadily decreased over the last years.


 I don't know how long you have played the game, but I've played since 2nd Ed, and it wasn't any more original, let me tell you. The additions of the Sororitas, Necrons, Tau...THESE are waaaaaay more imaginative than IG Beastmen, Space Dwarves, and Jetbikes all round.

Please, don't just rant opinion, it's a waste of everyone's time.

EDIT: JokerGod, your argument is presented well in that last post, thanks. However, there is a flaw in your reasoning. Codex:Space Wolves. The whole reason it doesn't really work now is BECAUSE it says refer to C:SM for a multitude of options, when they can only be done justice by a seperate book. SW have ALWAYS been seperate, they were one of the first Codexes to be released, and they should always BE seperate. When a new SM codex comes out, it invalidates any 'refer to' links, as often options are radically changed or removed altogether. 

You still haven't posited any suggestions as to why the Inquisition should have 2 books, or Chaos.


----------



## Bloodspeaker (Mar 15, 2008)

> Looks we'll have to agree to disagree here, as the fact that the units aren't interchangeable doesn't tie in with your assesment, but it looks like you won't be swayed. Although, again, DAEMONS!!!!!


Fair enough and DAEMONS FTW!!!! 



> Firstly, the Imperium is Xenophobic, not racist. Secondly, what?!? How on EARTH is making the biggest range of non-human characters in any collection of table-top games either racist or xenophobic?!?!


Please tell how do you perceive the phrases purge the alien , suffer not the alien to live and others like that, what do you believe they mean by that...
Of course that doesn't mean that they aren't xenophobic puritans, supremacists, religious fundamentalists, fanatics, zealots and generally very narrow minded.

So when do you create a universe populated by many races and yet you clearly choose one of them to be clearly superior and you focus most of your attention and resources towards them what does that make you? If you know a better and more appropriate term please enlighten me.



> Space Marines are the ONLY entirely original thoughts GW have had in the 40k universe (that've ever been playable) Eldar = Elves, Orks = Orcs...Necrons = Undead, I mean, COME ON!


I would go as far as saying that not even SM are that original.
It's easy to get confused by that sentence and that is my fault for not being clear enough, when i said creative i meant the entirety of the universe and flavor of the game of course the game was built upon older foundations nothing wrong with that.



> I don't know how long you have played the game, but I've played since 2nd Ed, and it wasn't any more original, let me tell you. The additions of the Sororitas, Necrons, Tau...THESE are waaaaaay more imaginative than IG Beastmen, Space Dwarves, and Jetbikes all round.


I have also been introduced to the game during the 2nd edition era although i was very young at that time and i agree about the originality comparisons you made although i admit i have i soft spot for dwarf bikers ( it must be because of the archetype) 



> Please, don't just rant opinion, it's a waste of everyone's time.


The thread has devolved to that after all whenever rumors like that crop up it's inevitable that the discussion will go down the same ol' path of whinning and complaining it's only natural, i believe you are a clever person and you could figure out where i was going just by reading the beginning of my post you could just ignore it and use your valuable time elsewhere yet you chose to answer so why are you complaining none forced you to read it.


----------



## TheKingElessar (Mar 31, 2009)

Bloodspeaker: You argue both sensibly, and with respect for the views of the other people involved. If only everyone showed the same consideration.

Honestly, xenophobic is the correct term in this case, racist doesn't apply, it only refers to perceived difference in the same species.

As for your post, if you think I was aggressive or over-the-top in my response, I'm sorry you took it that way, my intention was merely to counter each of your points in turn, and have a reasoned debate. You also seem to be a clever person, and if it seems I overreacted because I was annoyed at reading another's stupid arguments, it was really nothing to do with you. To be fair, me answering your points is better than some of the alternatives


----------



## Bloodspeaker (Mar 15, 2008)

TheKingElessar: I thanks you for all your compliments and i return them in kind.
I don't want to sound belligerent or anything but my bitternes all those years about the way they handle this game has taken it's toll and sometimes i overreact but it's really aggression that is directed at GW although sometimes other people are caught in the crossfire.


----------



## AzraelJahannam (Jun 28, 2008)

Well now that everyone is buddy buddy, Who's PUMPED about the possibility of a NEW codex for our favorite blood crazed, jump packing, chainsword loving, angelically yet vampirically alluded, power armored, honour bound, Sons of Sanguinius!?!?!?! For our Emperor and our Beloved Martyred Primarch! I am excited.


----------



## Lord Reevan (May 1, 2008)

JokerGod said:


> BA are not a different army, everything is basically the same, you get the same vehicles, the same units and the same wargear, yes yes I know you have one or two things that are special to you alone, and that is fine, they should have that to give the SM some difference, I ma not arguing about that, but instead of a new book all they should get is an errata saying "Refer to Codex Space Marines" for all of there war gear that is no longer up to date, when they put out a new Codex for one the old ones become out dated and every one starts to cry about it, by having the chapters linked to one central book it removes the point of them being out dated.


So because chaos gets predators, terminators, land raiders, rhinos, and a lot of the same things that marines get shoudl they be put into they same book? because sisters get the same armiur, same weapons, rhinos etc shoudl they be put into the same book? 
To be honest your arguement isn't that strong. They have similarities doesn't mean they are the same army. taking that idea then all MEQs shoudl be in one book, all GEQs should have another and that's just bullshit then. 
They have their own codex because, although they are marines, they play in a very different and varied manner compared to codex:marines, thus they have a different codex. Also the current PDF was treated more of an errata than an actual codex. they said it would be followed up by a printed version soon..... It was always coming. And I believe it is good that it's so close to the wolves as they will use the majority of the stuff from that in it....


----------



## TheKingElessar (Mar 31, 2009)

No....please, don't start him off again! He didn't reply to rational argument when I tried it, he's very unlikely to do so now. It's better to just smile and nod, then keep talking like he's not here.


----------



## Lord Reevan (May 1, 2008)

I'm allowed to voice my opinion on it too. Don't censor me!... but yeah I agree with you... better to bring this back to the actual rumour rather than the fairness of it


----------



## inquisitoryorei (Nov 25, 2007)

few points......

1. when the codex was printed in WD, part 1 was followed by a Standard Bearer dedicated to explaining why it was being done in this manner. (issue 329 pp.87)

2. this thread started with a "RUMOUR", not a "it definitely is coming at this time" post.

3. it could come 3 months after SW or 3 years after, we dont KNOW (GW being as they are at this time)

4. either way you look at it, there are too many codices that are not up to date with the fifth edition rules.


----------



## TheKingElessar (Mar 31, 2009)

inquisitoryorei said:


> few points......
> 
> 1. when the codex was printed in WD, part 1 was followed by a Standard Bearer dedicated to explaining why it was being done in this manner. (issue 329 pp.87)
> 
> ...


Damn your perfectly reasonable logic! How dare you sir!

I think it would be reasonable to conclude that after SW and BA, if indeed these are the two following IG, we will not see a new codex for any flavour of SM next year at all, which can only be good news for DE, Necrons etc. Whatcha reckon?


----------



## AzraelJahannam (Jun 28, 2008)

I must say, I see Dark Eldar coming before Blood Angels, as they've actually been in the works, and long in the pipes. Though I play, and love blood angels, I do hope Dark Eldar come first, as they truly deserve it, and are so freaking wicked, while as freaking wicked Blood Angels are, we do have a relatively up to date crappy PDF (Which does play well I have to admit in its defense) that can keep us going until after DE have gotten their fair share of love. Which would make sense really, popping out a xenos in between two Chapters to break things up a little. I personally would have preferred DE getting their love before SW's even, but se la vie. But either way, as long as Blood ANgles are coming down the pipes in relatively short time, I'm happy. 

BLOOD FOR THE BLOOD... errr... Emperor!.... yeah... Emperor.


----------



## CQBean (Mar 16, 2009)

The only CC sqd for the BA that i've had any luck with is my death company and Mephiston other then that all the other sqds are just expensive shooters.


----------



## admiraldick (Sep 9, 2008)

inquisitoryorei said:


> 2. this thread started with a "RUMOUR", not a "it definitely is coming at this time" post.


if i'd have been any more definite i'd have been torn a new one by my mate. if it had been just my own neck i would have stuck it out, but its not, so i'm not going to.



AzraelJahannam said:


> I must say, I see Dark Eldar coming before Blood Angels, as they've actually been in the works, and long in the pipes.


i personally cannot. from what i understand of it, the DE will not be out for quite a while, because Jes Goodwin is personally sculpting the whole range, and he's being all perfectionist about it. conversely BA are supposedly ready to go.


----------



## inquisitoryorei (Nov 25, 2007)

admiraldick said:


> if i'd have been any more definite i'd have been torn a new one by my mate. if it had been just my own neck i would have stuck it out, but its not, so i'm not going to.
> 
> 
> 
> i personally cannot. from what i understand of it, the DE will not be out for quite a while, because Jes Goodwin is personally sculpting the whole range, and he's being all perfectionist about it. conversely BA are supposedly ready to go.


i understand. its just that some of the people are replying as if you had said it was coming out at a certain time, and you had not.


----------



## AzraelJahannam (Jun 28, 2008)

CQBean said:


> The only CC sqd for the BA that i've had any luck with is my death company and Mephiston other then that all the other sqds are just expensive shooters.


Err.... The you're not using them properly? That honor guard and the veteran assault squad can be beasts in cc when tooled up correctly, it's just a matter of setting them up right and placing them properly. Have Meph, the DC, HG, and VAS hit the enemy like a ton of bricks, then have your RASs follow up behind and either do mop up or take objectives. This is while you're drop podding furioso's on your opponents head... Even orks get turned into piles of goo when they get nailed by that combined might... Much as I dislike the slap together job of that PDF, you can make a nasty cc army with it and it works fine for me right now.


----------



## Vanchet (Feb 28, 2008)

They're a chapter which has it's is just as balance as other chapters with the exception of fast Vechiles (I personally thought this should've been for the White Scars)
I would like to see the chapter suffer the blood rage flaw though (made it random)
Also they better not degrade the BA Chaplains (it's upsetted me enough to know that Chaplains r weaker now)


----------



## admiraldick (Sep 9, 2008)

inquisitoryorei said:


> i understand. its just that some of the people are replying as if you had said it was coming out at a certain time, and you had not.


to be honest it doesn't sound much like anyone is interested in the idea of a new BA codex. some are wuilling to defend the current one, others are wanting to see thenm dropped, but there are precious few that seem interested in the future.


----------



## TheKingElessar (Mar 31, 2009)

Ill be interested if the BA get taken on a different direction, or Tycho finally gets removed from the Codex for good, but otherwise I can't see this being anything but an update for the PDF. If any info comes up to the contrary I'd be happy to discuss it, but I really don't think anything major will happen.


----------



## Katie Drake (Nov 28, 2007)

Yeah I doubt anything too major will happen. In all likelihood it'll just be the PDF list updated to be more in line with the current Space Marines and a few tweaks here and there. The fluff, art and such should be interesting, though. We really got shafted in those departments.


----------



## TheKingElessar (Mar 31, 2009)

Katie Drake said:


> . We really got shafted in those departments.



I heard you liked th...errr, I mean, yeah, when even the Vespid have more Codex'd fluff than you, you know you're being sidelined (spoken as a Scythes of the Emperor player...)


----------



## Fluff'Ead (Aug 22, 2007)

Lord Reevan said:


> So because chaos gets predators, terminators, land raiders, rhinos, and a lot of the same things that marines get shoudl they be put into they same book? because sisters get the same armiur, same weapons, rhinos etc shoudl they be put into the same book?


Well, should the White Scars? The Black Dragons? Or the Iron Hands?



Lord Reevan said:


> They have their own codex because, although they are marines, they play in a very different and varied manner compared to codex:marines, thus they have a different codex.


The only reason BA play differently from "Codex Chapters" (which is a rather loose term) is because GW wants them to play like that. They do follow the Codex for the most part.
Index Astartes and Codex: Armageddon pretty much show that any SM Chapter can be given special rules and oh-so-unique characteristics.


----------



## TheKingElessar (Mar 31, 2009)

Fluff'Ead said:


> Well, should the White Scars? The Black Dragons? Or the Iron Hands?
> 
> The only reason BA play differently from "Codex Chapters" (which is a rather loose term) is because GW wants them to play like that. They do follow the Codex for the most part.
> Index Astartes and Codex: Armageddon pretty much show that any SM Chapter can be given special rules and oh-so-unique characteristics.


It's kinda like comparing Chalk and Cheese here. Or Eldar and the Dark Kin. Blood Angels were one of the original Chapters from Rogue Trader. They've always been seperate from the 'Codex' Chapters. They've always had a Tourny legal list. (obviously, ignoring at the very start of 3rd here...) The other Chapters you name have NEVER had seperate Tourny legal lists. The Scars are now adequately represented by the regular Codex, as are the Hands. Black Dragons don't matter. BAs do mostly follow the Codex, but the ways in which they dont are too huge to be available to all chapters without being stupidly broken - Calgar in a Rhino with a Death Company squad? I don't think so. Baal Predators all round? Don't think so. When you look at it from the perspective of "Does it do justice to the history and awesomeness of the Blood Angels?" they HAVE to have their own Codex. And that's not what this thread is for.


----------



## inquisitoryorei (Nov 25, 2007)

read the first article of astromag #4 over on warseer for a good explanation of why GW does and doesnt do certain things. would have had this up earlier but my thread was deleted because someone thought i was advertising something. where he or she got the idea, i dont know. anyway, check it out.


----------

