Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
Play with better people, then.

Better- how can you say this JohnHwangDD? Most of the players out there play one or more of those three armies these days!

Lately, my primary opponents have been playing Orks to my IG (& SoB). It's been great!

I'm pretty sure JohnHwangDD is just amusing himself at this point by trolling this and the boob armor thread...

On topic, I do think Adepta Sororitas need some sort of boost. They don't need to be tier 1, but the Genestealer Cult codex is a great expample of how units with midling stats, can be interesting and viable with combinations of formation sepcial rules.

Things that wouldn't be out of hand:
Free Transports: Space Marines Codex
Free Master Crafted Upgrade to Flamer/melta: Salamanders Chapter
Zealot bubble
Furious Charge Bubble
Increased Invulnerable Save
3 of Same vehicle in unit gets bonus

No, I'm telling you that my way of playing is very satisfying.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
No, I'm telling you that my way of playing is very satisfying.

For you - but it would be good to have a bit wider appeal without suddenly jumping to WAAC or other hyperbolic descriptions which seems to be your only alternative.

I (and many others) think it would be better that you did not have to actively decide that only certain armies play each other and that pick up games should be roughly equal or at least not the massive power gap that is presently the case with the 7.5 edition codexes and everyone else.

Making Sisters better than they are now with formation bonuses and the like is almost certainly happening as its not in GWs interests to make another "weak" codex like DE, IG or Orks.

As I've said before and elsewhere, people should be handicapping their games. Both for player skill and for army power.

You're saying Sisters need to be powered up with the Codices that people whine about as being broken, to sell more models. That is, by definition, an invitation for WAAC player to bandwagon on. I disagree with that.

Sisters with formations can be matched with IG and Orks and their formations (both of those armies actually do have formations).

I don't think GS cults need formation rules to be interesting and effective. GSC are just interesting by themselves and if you did away with formations all together they would still be effective. Formations continue to be the worst part of 40k.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
As I've said before and elsewhere, people should be handicapping their games. Both for player skill and for army power.

You're saying Sisters need to be powered up with the Codices that people whine about as being broken, to sell more models. That is, by definition, an invitation for WAAC player to bandwagon on. I disagree with that.

Sisters with formations can be matched with IG and Orks and their formations (both of those armies actually do have formations).

People would not need to handicap their game if the balance was remotely there - that's my point.

You're saying that Sisters should be kept at a low tier so that people can't whine about it being broken (or even effective).

That is part of the problem that has been killing 40k - the terrible balance between armies. All armies should be brought up to or down to the same level - it does not matter which.

40kenthusiast wrote:
In terms of a rule to change this, how bout something like:

"Slaughterface: Wounds caused by models with this rule can only be saved against once, no rerolls, and no FNP or Reanimation Protocols or anthing else."

Then spam that like candy all over their dex. Make them the army that you can't be durable vs. Best anyone can do vs a particular roll is a 2+, so if you inflict 6X their wounds you kill them.

Only if it gets to keep that name.

Jathom wrote:

Same situation holds true for people who played Eldar before the 6th Ed codex came out. We get called Power Gamers, WAAC players, and all the other FOTM names just because the army we've played for over a decade suddenly became the big kid on the block. It's not our fault and if you don't like it, then quit spamming SM Razorbacks for free and pairing them with Skyhammer Annihilation Forces.

Eldar didn't "suddenly" become overpowered. They've been the most overpowered army in the game since 3rd edition, except for a relatively brief period during 5th where they didn't get a 5th ed dex and armies like Grey Knights caught up.

 Mr Morden wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
As I've said before and elsewhere, people should be handicapping their games. Both for player skill and for army power.

You're saying Sisters need to be powered up with the Codices that people whine about as being broken, to sell more models. That is, by definition, an invitation for WAAC player to bandwagon on. I disagree with that.

Sisters with formations can be matched with IG and Orks and their formations (both of those armies actually do have formations).

People would not need to handicap their game if the balance was remotely there - that's my point.

You're saying that Sisters should be kept at a low tier so that people can't whine about it being broken (or even effective).

That is part of the problem that has been killing 40k - the terrible balance between armies. All armies should be brought up to or down to the same level - it does not matter which.

Actually, they should still be handicapping for skill and intersection of play style with army focus. Second, game balance will never be perfect. Third, it is ridiculous that the only way to play is by lining up "even" points.

I'm saying Sisters should be basic tier like the things that they should most commonly be.

Any time 40k has Codices, it has had terrible balance. This is nothing new. That's killing 40k isn't the imbalance, it's the fact that the game itself has become bloated with ticky-tack special rules and unplayable. That said, the fact that several armies are top-tier tournament competitive with each other is a relatively rare phenomenon - usually it's only 1 or 2 lists that are really competitive, with maybe a spoiler. The only time more lists were remotely balanced was when we were all using the rulebook lists in 3E.

Equal points is not the "Only" way to play but if you just want to rock up and have a game it s the easiest way to get a reasonable game - or should be - if 40k was remotely balanced.

Rules bloat is an issue but the sheer magnitude of the current imbalance is as muich or more of a problem

 JohnHwangDD wrote:


That is part of the problem that has been killing 40k - the terrible balance...

Actually, they should still be handicapping for skill and intersection of play style with army focus. Second, game balance will never be perfect. Third, it is ridiculous that the only way to play is by lining up "even" points.

I'm saying Sisters should be basic tier like the things that they should most commonly be.

Any time 40k has Codices, it has had terrible balance. This is nothing new. That's killing 40k isn't the imbalance, it's the fact that the game itself has become bloated with ticky-tack special rules and unplayable. That said, the fact that several armies are top-tier tournament competitive with each other is a relatively rare phenomenon - usually it's only 1 or 2 lists that are really competitive, with maybe a spoiler. The only time more lists were remotely balanced was when we were all using the rulebook lists in 3E.

Just adding to what you're say... I think there are a lot of caveats to talking about balance. 2 overly "competitive" codices is just as bad game design as 2 under performing ones, and shouldn't be something a codex aspires to... though some people mistakenly feel it should.


As far as SoB abilities go... what makes sense... Before any special rules SoB, as they are portrayed, should be somewhere between Scions and Marines. The SoB special rules boil down to how divine and miraculous we should believe them to be and that is easily scaled accordingly.

In general it strikes me that their faith and miracles should really be a late game advantage, that no matter how dire the game is going you can't count them out... otherwise I think their other abilities should be felt as strong allies and should be a synergistically strong one... imagine if the IG had a whole block of priest leading a charge how inspired they'd be... SoB would be like that but better.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
Play with better people, then.

I think while this seems like a great concept it's much harder to accomplish in practice. I have a lot of great people I play with but I've also done pick up games at the FLGS and in those situations I have no idea who or what I'll be playing against. In the latter example my options are to either play against whatever force my opponent has brought or deny the game after looking at his list. I essentially lose out on getting to play because GW can't write a balanced game system where power lists don't exist or are at least neutered to the point that a well played casual list can at least put up a fight. An acceptable balance is achievable in 40k. GW hasn't proven thus far that they don't know what they're doing on the rules front but other companies have wonderful TT games that reach good levels of balance. Power lists will always exist but the goal here to is reach a point that a power list used by a complete amateur will lose to a casual list run by someone who can think tactically and knows what they're doing.

We can change the rules of the game to better suit more players and be more fun. We can't change the people who play the game. "Play with better people" is NOT a solution.

 Inevitable_Faith wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
Play with better people, then.

I think while this seems like a great concept it's much harder to accomplish in practice. I have a lot of great people I play with but I've also done pick up games at the FLGS and in those situations I have no idea who or what I'll be playing against. In the latter example my options are to either play against whatever force my opponent has brought or deny the game after looking at his list. I essentially lose out on getting to play because GW can't write a balanced game system where power lists don't exist or are at least neutered to the point that a well played casual list can at least put up a fight. An acceptable balance is achievable in 40k. GW hasn't proven thus far that they don't know what they're doing on the rules front but other companies have wonderful TT games that reach good levels of balance. Power lists will always exist but the goal here to is reach a point that a power list used by a complete amateur will lose to a casual list run by someone who can think tactically and knows what they're doing.

We can change the rules of the game to better suit more players and be more fun. We can't change the people who play the game. "Play with better people" is NOT a solution.

Rules don't exist for "better players" they exist because many people aren't better.

 Lance845 wrote:
I don't think GS cults need formation rules to be interesting and effective. GSC are just interesting by themselves and if you did away with formations all together they would still be effective. Formations continue to be the worst part of 40k.

I disagree. Without their formations they are almost indistinguishable from guard with allied genestealers. The formations are what make the army FEEL like a genestealer cult. Formations when used correctly can be used to enhance the fluffiness of an army and act as a bandaid for weaker models. are actually awesome, it's the crazy seesawing power level that sucks. I mean seriously, how do a riptide wing and a reclusium command squad exist in the same game?

ERJAK wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
I don't think GS cults need formation rules to be interesting and effective. GSC are just interesting by themselves and if you did away with formations all together they would still be effective. Formations continue to be the worst part of 40k.

I disagree. Without their formations they are almost indistinguishable from guard with allied genestealers. The formations are what make the army FEEL like a genestealer cult. Formations when used correctly can be used to enhance the fluffiness of an army and act as a bandaid for weaker models. are actually awesome, it's the crazy seesawing power level that sucks. I mean seriously, how do a riptide wing and a reclusium command squad exist in the same game?

I have a love/hate relationship with formations for this reason. On the one hand you're right, they do Band-Aid fix weak units to adjust their power levels to an acceptable level and they often do add fun fluffy rules to what would normally be a basic unit. On the flip side many formations give great bonuses to units that already had top tier rules and didn't need any more stuff to make them awesome. The other issue is that not all formations are created equal. Some have crazy specific requirements for little to no real advantage while others are wonderfully versatile that offer huge advantages to their respective units. Some formations are simply outright more powerful than others. Formations, as they are handled right now, were a great idea that got carried away and were poorly implemented with little to no consideration to how they'd affect the game and its power level.

In a perfect game system we wouldn't need formations to Band-Aid fix weak units because the game would be balanced to a point that there would be no units that need the fix. We also wouldn't need formations for fluffy reasons because the special rules that make an army unique and fun to play would be rolled into the core codex of that army. Having formations in this perfect game system would then be a way to build fluffy lists that break away from the standard FOC and allow you to take special combinations of units not normally available in a CAD without moving the power-scale of the game in either direction.

In theory I like the idea of formations but they are a hard part of the game to balance right now especially since the core of the game is woefully imbalanced as is. And I know above I mention the "perfect" game system. This is hyperbole of course as perfection is not achievable but I feel the rules can reach a point of very strong balance and fluffiness that makes the vast majority of the player-base happy, that is what I mean by "perfect" game system.

The current edition of 40k runs on formations. As long as Codex: Adepta Sororitas belongs to the current edition their codex will include formations.

40k Game Balance and whether people love or hate Formations has been discussed ad nauseum in other threads.

Can we please keep this thread about Adepta Sororitas ?

Sisters have always been in a strange place. They don't support them because they don't sell... but why would they have ever sold given that they've never actually been supported at basically any point ever? I just don't get the attitude from GW, and never have. If they don't want to take their own product seriously, why do they expect anyone else is going to?

Ideally I'd like to see GW *actually* support sisters with a serious offering of models this time around. I'd also like to see them either get serious about their rules and just pay basically anyone else the entire industry to write some real rules, or just do what Age of Sigmar should have been and do full historical. Completely abolish points and replace them with fake-historical "real" formations made up of very strict listings of models and equipment. Want to play Sisters? Here is a codex outlining several strict fake-historically accurate forces with detailed battle accounts to glean tactics from, paint scheme details down to he exact shade of red used in the summer of 39,994, and you are taking X heavy bolters because that is what they HAD and you will use them to see if you can simulate how they might have performed in battle against various other fake-historically accurate forces to better understand the nature of war in the grimdark future, with all considerations of their point cost vs MEQ killing efficiency having nothing to do with anything.

I'd buy either one of those. Not interested in the slightest if they want to try and re-package the same old Big Mac that is just pure grossness at this point, and in all brutal honesty, that is really what GW products are at this point: a gross and outdated offering with nothing keeping it relevant beyond momentum and nostalgia.

Sleipnir wrote:
Sisters have always been in a strange place. They don't support them because they don't sell... but why would they have ever sold given that they've never actually been supported at basically any point ever?

Sisters were fully-supported at the end of 2E, with a full Codex and full range of minis. There were more Sisters than Necrons at that time.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

Sleipnir wrote:
Sisters have always been in a strange place. They don't support them because they don't sell... but why would they have ever sold given that they've never actually been supported at basically any point ever?

Sisters were fully-supported at the end of 2E, with a full Codex and full range of minis. There were more Sisters than Necrons at that time.

As long as you realize this was literally for a couple months and then 3rd came out.

The claim was that they weren't ever supported, and that was false. He didn't say for how long.

If history is any guide, with a radically new edition looming on the horizon, maybe Sisters will get a new Codex after all!

I'd be okay with Adepta Sororitas getting a 7th edition codex, even if it is 6 months before 8th edition 40K drops. I'm confident that 8th edition will invalidate 7th edition codexes about as much as 7th edition invalidated the 5th and 6th edition ones. If I'm wrong about that, at least I'll have all the codexes I need to keep playing 7th edition.

 adamsouza wrote:
On topic, I do think Adepta Sororitas need some sort of boost. They don't need to be tier 1, but the Genestealer Cult codex is a great expample of how units with midling stats, can be interesting and viable with combinations of formation sepcial rules.

Things that wouldn't be out of hand:
Free Transports: Space Marines Codex
Free Master Crafted Upgrade to Flamer/melta: Salamanders Chapter
Zealot bubble
Furious Charge Bubble
Increased Invulnerable Save
3 of Same vehicle in unit gets bonus

Lack of CC is one of the most common complaints I've seen about the Sisters since I started playing them in 3rd Edition, but that's silly, because close combat is not what the Sisters do. It's **never** been the Sister's strength, and trying to make it so is one of the reasons the Codex is in such a state.

Free transports and Mastercrafting makes sense for Smurfs, where everything costs an arm and a leg and every miss hurts. Sisters don't fit that archetype at all. Everything is cheap, plentiful, and can do tricks. They don't need handouts. They need people to understand what they are and what they do.

As it stands most Sisters units work fine in an Allied detachment, and to be quite honest I'd be happy keeping them that way. If you wanted to make them a viable army in their own right without utterly rebooting the faction and re-configuring it for close combat, you start by recognising that Sisters don't do close combat. They are a cheap, mechanised, mid-range stand-off shooting army, and their wargear, special rules, and gimmicks should reflect this. With that in mind, here's my suggestions:

== All squads except Repentia get defensive grenades as standard instead of assault grenades. Include an option to swap them for assault grenades if you like, but count on it never being used.

== Instead of silly assault-oriented AoF (Making it easier for my S3 I3 Command Squad to get into combat? Yeah, thanks, guy), give them AoF which reflect their desire to avoid combat. Off the top of my head: an AoF which allows Celestians to fire Overwatch at their full BS, an AoF which allows Command Squads to move D6" if a charge is declared against them, make the Veteran Superiors grant something like ATSKNF to a squad, that kind of thing.

== Mobility is decisive in 7th Edition (hence all those Warp Spider/ White Scars lists winning tournaments), and Sisters rely on vehicles to provide theirs. However, vehicles are nowhere near as resilient as they were in 5th - which is good for the game, but bad for the Sisters. The solution to this is tricky without changing the fluff to give Sisters jetbikes and Deep Strike, but there are ways to do it. A formation which gives ObSec to Seraphim and Dominions (requires Celestine as an HQ), wargear which improves their vehicle's resilience and safeguards their ability to move, etc etc.

== Repentia. Ever since 3rd Edition there have been individuals who insist they're awesome because 250pts of them could kill a Dreadnought. These individuals are misguided. Their current iteration is better than the 3rd Edition version, but they're still an overpriced, half-assed melee "deathstar" which doesn't really fit comfortably in the kind of army Sisters want to build. In the brave new world of shooty Sisters I'd make them 60pts for a squad of 5 plus the Mistress, +7 per extra model. At that price point you don't get an Eviscerator; you get a Two-Handed Chainsword (+1S, AP-) instead. You can have the Eviscerator for +10pts per model if you want it, but it's an all-or-nothing deal; either every model gets an Eviscerator, or nobody does. No transport options; instead they get Move Through Cover, and a max unit size of 14 Repentia plus Mistress. The Mistress costs 28pts in this set up, which is not justified by Neural Whips and Power Armour alone, so the whole unit has Counter-Attack and Feel No Pain while she's alive. They now get FNP as standard so need a new AoF: Fury of the Penitent, tested for at the start of either player's assault phase, if successful the unit gains Rampage until the end of the current assault phase - this keeps them relevant as the game wears on and they start to lose models, which they will, being T3 with a 6++ save and 5+ FNP. Without Eviscerators this unit would cost you 120pts, which seems reasonable for a throwaway meat shield/ tarpit unit with middling close combat ability and zero resilience, which is always how I imagined sensible Canonesses would use their Repentia. They die so the good Sisters don't have to. If you want the silly "deathstar" version it'll cost 220pts, which seems reasonable for a novelty CC unit.

== Take those Inquisition warband-style units and throw them right in the bin. Instead, change the Priests and bring back the old WD Zealot Mobs. Now, instead of being pointless ICs who bestow irrelevant CC buffs on your shooty Sisters units, you can take one Priest for every squad of Battle Sisters in your army, but the Priest must be taken as part of a Ministorum Mob. The Mob consists of 9-29 Peasants plus the Priest, who are GEQs with WS1, BS1, Ld6, and no armour save. Each Peasant has frag grenades, a single close combat weapon and a Mob Gun (Range 12", S3, AP-, Assault 1, Unreliable (remove a Peasant from the mob every time a 1 is rolled to hit when shooting with this weapon)). While the Priest is alive, he confers Zealot, War Hymns and Shield of Faith on the Mob, and is treated as an Infantry (Character) attached to the Mob, not an IC. Mobs cannot be joined by any other ICs, and cannot benefit from any special rules other than those conferred by the Priest. When the unit charges the Priest must end his charge in base to base contact with an enemy; if the Priest is too far away to reach, exchange him for a Peasant model in base contact with a charged unit. The Priest must always issue and accept challenges whenever possible. If the Priest is ever removed from play for any reason his Mob must take a Morale check immediately, and a Morale check at the beginning of every subsequent movement phase (owning player's and opponent's); if the test is failed the mob is removed from play immediately, as if it had been destroyed by a sweeping advance. If the Preist survives the destruction of his Mob, he becomes an IC again and is free to join units as normal.

I've got a small suggestion relating to the fluff of the sisters:

Celestians are the elite of the sisters right? The highest in the order? Yet 'Celestian' is simply a generic term for something heavenly. The term 'Seraphim' however is defined as 'an angelic being, regarded in traditional Christian angelology as belonging to the highest order of the ninefold celestial hierarchy, associated with light, ardour, and purity'. As the name refers to the highest ranking Angels, should 40k Seraphims not be the highest ranking sisters? Especially since they're using a jump pack? Or did I miss something?

Also, keeping with your suggestions BBAP, should Seraphim squads change their jump packs for jet packs? I always felt that the latter suited shooty units better than the former anyway. Having said that, with pistols it doesn't really matter I suppose.

40K is famous is famous for "drive the tank closer so I can hit them with my sword." While I appreciate that you may feel they are best suited outside of assault, they will eventually end up in an assault.

Zealout, Furious Charge etc.. are in line with fluff and existing trends for what religious inspiration does for models in 40K. It may not be the most optimal buff for your chosen playstyle, but it's something likely to turn up in a GW rulebook.

Master Crafted Melta/Flamers for Salamanders are there becuase it's fluffy. They use them a lot, so they are better at using them. Sisters Holy Trinity of Bolter, Flamer, Melta puts them in a similar situation, so again it's fluffy, and there is a precedent for it in the existing rules. It's also not game breaking, so another likely candidate.

Increased Invulnerable save: 6++ is slightly better than nothing. 5++ is what Daemons, and now Purestrains, get. It might as well be a meaningful save if they are going tohave the rule at all.

Wargear: Adepta Sororitas have so far stuck to a limited assortment of IoM, mostly Adeptus Astartes type, wargear. Power Armor, Bolters, Flamers, Meltas, Assault Grenades. I'm pretty sure, as well armed as they are, they don't have a R&D department or the resources of the Astartes or Astra Militarum. This would make jetpacks, jet bikes, and even defensive grenades radical departures from their existing wargear

Simplify the Acts of Faith into special rules that make the units acutally different from each other, and eliminate the one use only .

Divine Guidance (Retributors): All weapons in the Retributors unit gain the Rending special rule
Endless Crusade (Sororitas Command Squad): All models in the Sororitas Command Squad’s unit gain the Fleet, Crusader and Move Through Cover special rules.
Hand of the Emperor (Celestians): All models in the Celestians’ unit gain the Furious Charge
Holy Fusillade (Dominions): All weapons in the Dominions unit have the Ignores Cover special rule.
Light of the Emperor (Battle Sisters): Preferred Enemy special rule
Spirit of the Martyr (Sisters Repentia): Feel No Pain
The Emperor’s Deliverance (Seraphim): All weapons in the Seraphim unit gain the Shred special rule.

If Battle Sisters are going to have prefered enemy, it should probably just be an armywide special rule

Jet packs would be nice, but jet packs and Inferno Pistols seems a bit beardy to me. They seem to do alright with jump packs as it is.

As far as I'm aware the Celestians and Seraphim are essentially your veteran squads. It's not that they're "higher ranked" or whatever, they're just more experienced than the Battle Sisters in the regular BSS, in the same way Sternguard and Vanguard veterans are just Tactical Marines who've proven themselves and can thus be trusted with the expensive kit.

Maybe Celestians and Serephim could be Ws and BS 5, with access to a larger array of weapons upgrades that are available at a discount?

 adamsouza wrote:
40K is famous is famous for "drive the tank closer so I can hit them with my sword." While I appreciate that you may feel they are best suited outside of assault, they will eventually end up in an assault.

It's not a "feeling" - these are S3, T3, I3 models with, at best, 2 attacks each, with a maximum squad size of 10 and no way to avoid being destroyed by Sweeping Advances. They also have BS4 and Boltguns. These are models best suited outside of assault. It's not that I've "chosen" to play Sisters as a shooty mech army, it's that that's the only way Sisters can function with any degree of success.

I get that in the fluff the Sisters sometimes go toe to toe with sinners or whatever - but even in the fluff that rarely goes well for them, and frankly, if we're talking fluff, we have to inevitably accept that at the end of the day the Sisters aren't Marines. They're regular humans. Highly trained humans with power armour and bolt guns, but humans nonetheless. They have that GEQ statline for a reason. It makes no sense in-universe that they'd be able to punch Marines or Genestealers to a standstill, and if you want to make it sensible you need to rewrite the army from scratch, including the fluff.

The Salamanders' fluff specifically says the whole Chapter is composed of artisan-level engineers who can maintain and tweak their own gear without help from the AdMech. The Sisters fluff says nothing of the sort, merely that they use Flamer and Melta weaponry a lot and don't use Plasma. In fluff terms Mastercrafted everything makes no sense, and on the tabletop it would be ridiculous considering the amount of Meltaguns and Flamers I could pack into an 1850 Sisters list. We agree on the jetbikes and jetpacks though; they're unnecessary, but the fact remains that mobility is important, vehicles can no longer be relied upon to provide it, and thus the Sisters need *something* if they're going to hang with the big boys in this Edition.

Shield of Faith is absolutely fine as a 6++ save. It's not supposed to be a Terminator save; it's there as an alternative to G2G which allows any models that are lucky enough to survive to act (i.e., shoot) next turn. In 3rd Edition you had to spend a Faith point to get it and hope you passed a Ld check. Now you just get it for nothing on all your squads all the time, which is great. Making it 5++ would just be cheesy, and would demand an increased points cost for all units in the Codex including the vehicles. Considering Sisters aren't particularly well-costed as things stand, I'd rather that not happen.

AoF more than once per game is either ridiculous (Dominions ignoring cover saves forever with their four Meltaguns) or pointless (T3 Repentia losing their FNP to Scatter Laser hits) depending on which unit you look at. The AoF functionality is fine as-is, the only problem with it is it gives CC bonuses to units that have no business entering CC voluntarily. Army-wide Preferred Enemy would be silly given the sheer amount of firepower a mech Sisters list can bring to bear.


Honestly, I think the problem here is less about Sisters being fundamentally broken, and more about you trying to shove a bolter-shaped peg into an assault-shaped hole and becoming frustrated when it doesn't fit. They have serious problems as an army, but they're not useless if you play them right.

 master of ordinance wrote:
Maybe Celestians and Serephim could be Ws and BS 5, with access to a larger array of weapons upgrades that are available at a discount?

Seraphim function perfectly well as they are; 3+ to hit with shooting and two shots each is good enough. Hitting on 2+ is not really enough of a bonus to justify the extra points you'd pay for the WS5/BS5. Celestians are largely pointless nowadays - in the days of strict Force Org Charts they used to be a good way to get more Immolators, special weapons and expendable infantry into a list, but nowadays you can take infinite BSS with Immolators so the need for them no longer exists. Making them more expensive just means I'm less likely to include them in an army - but I'm never going to include them anyway, so crack on if you like.

I don't see how access to Wargear helps either unit. It allows me to dump more points into them, but that's not something I want to do.

AoF CC bonuses aren't to get SoB into CC; they are to get them *out* of CC.

And no SoB need WS5 / BS5 - that's just stat inflation. SoB are still just a fancy flavor of Imperial Guard, with the same core S3 T3 I3 W1 human stats.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
AoF CC bonuses aren't to get SoB into CC; they are to get them *out* of CC.

Command Squads AoF gives them MTC, Crusader and Fleet. Celestians get FC. Both are rolled for at the start of the owning players assault phase. These are abilities you pop before charging, not while you're locked in combat. The Canoness' Hatred AoF might qualify, except the Sisters' weaksauce melee ability makes it pretty much useless for getting units out of combat. Repentia get FNP(3) which is manifestly intended to keep them fighting.

None of these abilities will help Sisters get out of combat.

SoB are still just a fancy flavor of Imperial Guard

Why, because they both have T3 I3? I'm not seeing the similarities beyond the statline. Trying to play Sisters like Guard is just as wrong as trying to play them like Marines or Blood Angels or Orks. They're not any of those things. They're Sisters of Battle. Guard take Dedicated Transports as Multilaser platforms for the most part whereas the Sisters rely on their boxes, since they have no long-range dakka to speak of (again, unlike the Guard) and thus need to shift units around the table constantly. What shooting they do have is far more reliable than anything the Guard can muster (Exorcists being the exception), though it's in much shorter supply. I'd say the Militarum Tempestus, from what little I know about them, are quite similar, except the MT get Deep Strike, Battle Cannons and Carapace Armour so even then it's not an easy comparison.

EDIT: MT get Fast transports too, apparently. Dayum.