So with the new strategic reserve rules announced are there any units you've been eyeing up to hold off the board?

I was sorta thinking about Repentia

 Sgt.Sunshine wrote:
So with the new strategic reserve rules announced are there any units you've been eyeing up to hold off the board?

I was sorta thinking about Repentia

I like 3 Mortifiers coming in on the flank and would cost 1CP, too bad they don’t benefit from miracle dice to help with the charge.

Speaking of Mortifiers, with all the changes I sorta regret assembling mine with flails. It seems like hordes are dying and being able to shoot your heavy bolters in combat seems like it'd help make up for the drop in attacks for taking saws.

 Sgt.Sunshine wrote:
Speaking of Mortifiers, with all the changes I sorta regret assembling mine with flails. It seems like hordes are dying and being able to shoot your heavy bolters in combat seems like it'd help make up for the drop in attacks for taking saws.

H.bolters have been go to with morts as well.

And saws you basically need t7 3+ or 2+ save to be worth it over flails. Even vs primaris you are looking at flails at even. How many t7 vehicles you plan to charge?

Unless flails become more expensive than saws they are go to. Oh and nevermind vs anything with 2 or more wounds with fnp or 3 wound models which hurts saw

Any primaris 2w infantry it's about wash. Custodes, aggressors etc flails. Fellow sisters walkers flails. De has grotesques etc flails. Targets saws are good are soooo few. Helverin/warglaive is good example of those. Immolators, rhinos etc another

Well good to know the math works out for flails.

Mind you with complete point review coming with new edition no quarantee they will stay same cost. Saw could(and without stat upgrade like flat dam 3 which would give more targets it's better than flail) be cheaper option.

With flat3 vs t8 3+ saw would cause about 2.5x damage, would be splatting custodians 1.48 per walker vs 2.22 wounds by flail. Flail would still be equal vs primaris, better vs w1 stuff and not as much hurt as saw is vs multiwound stuff with fnp

I could take 2 5 girl Dominion squads with meltaguns in rhinos and for 2 cp keep them in reserve than bring them in in turn 2 or 3 to slow down or wreck possible threats that my excorsits and bolters can't deal with without exposing said units to enemy firepower turn 1.

Or the same squads in Immolators but that'd be 1 CP more. It'd help get the immos into enemy lines without fear of turn 1 destruction but that's a lot of CP pregame.

jivardi wrote:
I could take 2 5 girl Dominion squads with meltaguns in rhinos and for 2 cp keep them in reserve than bring them in in turn 2 or 3 to slow down or wreck possible threats that my excorsits and bolters can't deal with without exposing said units to enemy firepower turn 1.

Or the same squads in Immolators but that'd be 1 CP more. It'd help get the immos into enemy lines without fear of turn 1 destruction but that's a lot of CP pregame.

Are you taking them in rhinos just to for the extra threat range when they disembark or to protect them a bit more? I thought the deployment prevented movement when they come in.

Rhino wall.

So with the new morale rules and only 1 model flees from a failed morale test and then 1/6 per model (1/3 under half strength) from combat attrition. do we think the only 1 model can flee from morale rules like from sacred rose works on combat attrition? if not that makes a double nerf to the order (overwatch change morale change)

you will have to wait for the FAQ and full rules their are lots of sub factions that effect moral/overwatch which have been nerfed across different armies - for all we know GW will change their wording entirely


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Sgt.Sunshine wrote:

jivardi wrote:
I could take 2 5 girl Dominion squads with meltaguns in rhinos and for 2 cp keep them in reserve than bring them in in turn 2 or 3 to slow down or wreck possible threats that my excorsits and bolters can't deal with without exposing said units to enemy firepower turn 1.

Or the same squads in Immolators but that'd be 1 CP more. It'd help get the immos into enemy lines without fear of turn 1 destruction but that's a lot of CP pregame.

Are you taking them in rhinos just to for the extra threat range when they disembark or to protect them a bit more? I thought the deployment prevented movement when they come in.

seems a valid concept but your not wrecking anything till T3 if that T1 in reserve T2 deploy in rhino T3 drop out of rhino if they didnt blow up rhino and shoot you first.

You would be better off either using seraphim or just putting the squads in reserve without rhino that way you shoot on T2

What's the current PL on an optimized Repentia bomb in Rhino? That's about the only thing I can imagine wanting on a turn 2-3 flank. Maybe a big unit of walkers. Even then I dont know that it will be worth the CP... the CP differential we've been enjoying will soon be gone and we will have fewer than were used to on top of that, so I suspect I'll be sticking with jump troops as reserves.

I am going to start looking at mech lists again, maybe a Battalion with triple melta BSS x3 in Immolators for early game board control and AT threat and melee bombs of Repentia and Celestians with support characters in Rhinos. I really enjoyed running 3x Exos, 3x Rhinos, and 3x Immos in 8th... nobody ever shut the whole party down.

I think it comes to 9 exactly if you take the preacher instead of the missionary

 MacPhail wrote:
What's the current PL on an optimized Repentia bomb in Rhino? That's about the only thing I can imagine wanting on a turn 2-3 flank. Maybe a big unit of walkers. Even then I dont know that it will be worth the CP... the CP differential we've been enjoying will soon be gone and we will have fewer than were used to on top of that, so I suspect I'll be sticking with jump troops as reserves.

I am going to start looking at mech lists again, maybe a Battalion with triple melta BSS x3 in Immolators for early game board control and AT threat and melee bombs of Repentia and Celestians with support characters in Rhinos. I really enjoyed running 3x Exos, 3x Rhinos, and 3x Immos in 8th... nobody ever shut the whole party down.

Mortifiers and pengines. 3 morties is exacly 9pl.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

jivardi wrote:
Rhino wall.

I think you mean 'suicide pinatas' the rhinos can't go anywhere and can't pop smoke; the troops can't get out. You're essentially just giving your opponent a free turn to deal with them, after being kind enough to let them spend the first turn dealing with everything else without worrying about the rhinos. Same with trying to pop in repentia or arcos. Immolators might be a useful thing to outflank...if immolators weren't terrible.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

jivardi wrote:

ERJAK wrote:

jivardi wrote:
Only thing I'm worried about is losing Sacred Rites. From the wording of the 3rd condition it sounds like it wouldn't because the Sacred Rites state that "all units have to have "AS or AM" keyword to get SR but the 3rd condition sounds like it negates that requirement even though "keyword" =/= "ability".

Some of those are pretty good. Not sure it'd be worth losing 2 Rites for an Assassin.

You 100% lose sacred rites, same as doctines. As for ot being worth, in 8th...maybe. In 9th the new character rules wreck assassins so probably not.

It's the general consensus over in YMDC that Sisters DON'T lose order convictions, just that Assassins don't benefit from them.

I'm sure it'll get FAQ'd.

They must have updated the assassins inclusion rules and I missed it then because RAW, as soon as the assassin is part of your army, not every unit is Sororitas or Ministorum, so the ability shuts off.

Looking at that thread, it looks like they updated the assasins rules in war of the spider so they don't break mono-army bonuses anymore.

I still don't think they're very good with the new LoS rules.

Oof. FLY no longer allows Fall Back and Shoot... my Seraphim just shrunk back down to minmax, I think. Maybe pairing them with Zephyrim will make enough of a difference to free them from melee before their own Shooting phase?

 MacPhail wrote:
Oof. FLY no longer allows Fall Back and Shoot... my Seraphim just shrunk back down to minmax, I think. Maybe pairing them with Zephyrim will make enough of a difference to free them from melee before their own Shooting phase?

I imagine the reason you want then to be freed from melee is so that you aren't forced to shoot the target they're in combat with?

Lemondish wrote:

 MacPhail wrote:
Oof. FLY no longer allows Fall Back and Shoot... my Seraphim just shrunk back down to minmax, I think. Maybe pairing them with Zephyrim will make enough of a difference to free them from melee before their own Shooting phase?

I imagine the reason you want then to be freed from melee is so that you aren't forced to shoot the target they're in combat with?

Yeah, that and freeing up their opponent in the shooting phase. I had been taking 7x units to ensure two good rounds of shooting. Falling back from countercharging Plague Marines to shoot Plagueburst Crawlers would be a typical scenario, or from Necron Warriors to shoot Destroyers. It's probably a necessary rules shift and not a devastating one, but one that will force some changes.

 MacPhail wrote:

Lemondish wrote:

 MacPhail wrote:
Oof. FLY no longer allows Fall Back and Shoot... my Seraphim just shrunk back down to minmax, I think. Maybe pairing them with Zephyrim will make enough of a difference to free them from melee before their own Shooting phase?

I imagine the reason you want then to be freed from melee is so that you aren't forced to shoot the target they're in combat with?

Yeah, that and freeing up their opponent in the shooting phase. I had been taking 7x units to ensure two good rounds of shooting. Falling back from countercharging Plague Marines to shoot Plagueburst Crawlers would be a typical scenario, or from Necron Warriors to shoot Destroyers. It's probably a necessary rules shift and not a devastating one, but one that will force some changes.

It's weird that your seraphim live that long. Are they valorous heart? Because even just standard rapid fire bolters shred seraphim pretty good.

ERJAK wrote:

 MacPhail wrote:

Lemondish wrote:

 MacPhail wrote:
Oof. FLY no longer allows Fall Back and Shoot... my Seraphim just shrunk back down to minmax, I think. Maybe pairing them with Zephyrim will make enough of a difference to free them from melee before their own Shooting phase?

I imagine the reason you want then to be freed from melee is so that you aren't forced to shoot the target they're in combat with?

Yeah, that and freeing up their opponent in the shooting phase. I had been taking 7x units to ensure two good rounds of shooting. Falling back from countercharging Plague Marines to shoot Plagueburst Crawlers would be a typical scenario, or from Necron Warriors to shoot Destroyers. It's probably a necessary rules shift and not a devastating one, but one that will force some changes.

It's weird that your seraphim live that long. Are they valorous heart? Because even just standard rapid fire bolters shred seraphim pretty good.

No, they don't live long at all. I had been running 2x7 with IPs. They drop on turns 2 and 3 with Deadly Descent and each unit typically hits a tank or monster, gets shot up and/or countercharged pretty hard, and about half the time they live to Fall Back and shoot again, so not much more than two turns on the board. Often it's just 1-2 models of the original 7 that survive, but when that means 4 inferno pistols with Miracle Dice, it's plenty. When they don't survive I'm usually happy with what my opponent invests in eliminating the AT threat. And yeah, they're usually Valorous Heart, and by the time they start dropping on T2 I can sometimes manage a defensive buff aura waiting in their drop zone.

ERJAK wrote:

 MacPhail wrote:

Lemondish wrote:

 MacPhail wrote:
Oof. FLY no longer allows Fall Back and Shoot... my Seraphim just shrunk back down to minmax, I think. Maybe pairing them with Zephyrim will make enough of a difference to free them from melee before their own Shooting phase?

I imagine the reason you want then to be freed from melee is so that you aren't forced to shoot the target they're in combat with?

Yeah, that and freeing up their opponent in the shooting phase. I had been taking 7x units to ensure two good rounds of shooting. Falling back from countercharging Plague Marines to shoot Plagueburst Crawlers would be a typical scenario, or from Necron Warriors to shoot Destroyers. It's probably a necessary rules shift and not a devastating one, but one that will force some changes.

It's weird that your seraphim live that long. Are they valorous heart? Because even just standard rapid fire bolters shred seraphim pretty good.

I find that seraphim are pretty bullet-spongy for their cost. And they don't need to live that long, they only need to live long enough to perform their mission.

 davidgr33n wrote:

 Sgt.Sunshine wrote:
So with the new strategic reserve rules announced are there any units you've been eyeing up to hold off the board?

I was sorta thinking about Repentia

I like 3 Mortifiers coming in on the flank and would cost 1CP, too bad they don’t benefit from miracle dice to help with the charge.

depending if they can advance or not from flank it wouldn't be to bad to use holy rage on them so they can advance, shoot, and charge

Hello, is there any general consensus on the matter of playing the germinae with Celestine? Are they dispensable or strongly advised?

Also, when the codex states that germinae can attempt to intercept attacks done against Celestine, does it only apply for fight phase or can it be done against shooting attacks?

Thanks in advance!

 ierp wrote:
Hello, is there any general consensus on the matter of playing the germinae with Celestine? Are they dispensable or strongly advised?

Also, when the codex states that germinae can attempt to intercept attacks done against Celestine, does it only apply for fight phase or can it be done against shooting attacks?

Thanks in advance!

The Geminae superia are arguably the worst unit in the game. They're a total waste of points. As for their intercept rule, it can be done in both phase, it just never will because you really shouldn't be taking them.

ERJAK wrote:

 ierp wrote:
Hello, is there any general consensus on the matter of playing the germinae with Celestine? Are they dispensable or strongly advised?

Also, when the codex states that germinae can attempt to intercept attacks done against Celestine, does it only apply for fight phase or can it be done against shooting attacks?

Thanks in advance!

The Geminae superia are arguably the worst unit in the game. They're a total waste of points. As for their intercept rule, it can be done in both phase, it just never will because you really shouldn't be taking them.

Wow that's an overstatement, I present exhibit A the mutilator and exhibit B the obelisk.

single geminae is a Cheap character to sit on a backfield objective really strong - in 8th

9th hasn’t even come out and I’m dreading it for my sisters with all the changes I’m seeing. It’s either mono BR and more CP or VH+BR and less CP. And we’re a CP-hungry faction.
So much for GW promise of “take the units you want to take” - 8th edition was MUCH FRIENDLIER for this statement

I'm feeling this too. I really like the hammer and anvil combo of Valorous Heart and Bloody Rose, both in terms of how it feels to command and how it plays in practice. I'll be bummed to give it up. It sounds like a Battalion w/ warlord goes +3/-3 and then... what? Pay 2 for a patrol or 3 more for a second Battalion? I was hoping 1CP for a Patrol, 2CP for a Vanguard/Spearhead/etc., and so on, and even then I'd have really had to think about it. And now the fortification seems a little more contentious too assuming they cost CP. Add Open the Reliquaries and Heroine in the Making and suddenly the army I've been imagining costs 6+CP just to get on the table. The +1 per turn will offset this, and obviously we haven't seen the whole scheme yet, but this makes core Strats like Blessed Bolts, Deadly Descent, etc. seem a little less spamable.

 davidgr33n wrote:
9th hasn’t even come out and I’m dreading it for my sisters with all the changes I’m seeing. It’s either mono BR and more CP or VH+BR and less CP. And we’re a CP-hungry faction.
So much for GW promise of “take the units you want to take” - 8th edition was MUCH FRIENDLIER for this statement

Sisters are not a CP hungry faction. I play multi factions and sisters are probably the 2nd least CP intensive in the imperium

Sisters have a lot of would likes but very few essentials and with say deadly descent its mostly covered by the CP per turn

You now need to make choices

Well for me It's basically wash. Brigade+vanquard=16 CP vs 18 in 9th ed. bat+bat+vanquard even less. So I'm less worried about that. I'm more worried about already broken good marines getting buff over buff over buff over buff over buff over buff...there's not been anything BAD for marines so far...

In otherwords got 3 game tournament with sister. Albeit casual 1k so not biggest reveals. Triumph was used for funs and it actually performed quite well. 1st game taking on damaged knight(12 wounds by single exorcist, 1 wound by lone sister superior just for lolz) before Triumph got around. With her relic and all the MD's and whatnot I got the knight down to 3 wounds. By all rights my 16 wound triumph should have survived the 2 combat rounds(he averages 10 damage assuming I use no MD on 2nd combat round) but dice cometh, dice giveth.

2nd game I was subjected to marine fire on super sparse board and then went on duel with invictor warsuit but was actually winning that one!

And on 3rd game most of ork force focused on her for couple rounds as I was deleting elements and she was still on last bracket at the end.

18 wounds, 4++, -1 to hit and with MD's fairly easy 2-3 saves quaranteed per phase made triumph surprisingly resilient.

if that were true it would be fine but its not

12+1 per turn does not equal 18.

most games are decided by 4 so really its 16 meaningfully

but you now have to pay for detatchments so that 16 becomes 14 assuming brigade + patrol and only 10 Pregame

so Pregame I'm spending
2-3 on relics (1 Extra VS Smite spam armies)
1 on imagifier
1 on Heroin in the making
0-2 on (variable Sacred rites)
2 on reserves (9th new spending)
So thats 6-9 and only starting with 10
(if fortifications costs more than 1CP) Something has to drop

The 3 CP for T1-T3 covers bolts and deadly descent

Nice thing is the only other strats worth using are BR strat and adv+charge both being 1CP so any saved from earlier brings them into the game

but its very tight

U02dah4 wrote:
if that were true it would be fine but its not

12+1 per turn does not equal 18.

most games are decided by 4 so really its 16 meaningfully

but you now have to pay for detatchments so that 16 becomes 14 assuming brigade + patrol and only 10 Pregame

so Pregame I'm spending
2-3 on relics (1 Extra VS Smite spam armies)
1 on imagifier
1 on Heroin in the making
0-2 on (variable Sacred rites)
2 on reserves (9th new spending)
So thats 6-9 and only starting with 10
(if fortifications costs more than 1CP) Something has to drop

The 3 CP for T1-T3 covers bolts and deadly descent

Nice thing is the only other strats worth using are BR strat and adv+charge both being 1CP so any saved from earlier brings them into the game

but its very tight

You say this here but in your previous post just 3 posts up you challenge my statement that Sisters “are not a CP-hungry faction.” You even admit after your pregame CP usage you only have about 3 CP to use in-game.

Which is it?

thats not CP Hungry thats workable

CP Hungry is admech by comparison

Mixed subfaction build

Extra WL 3CP
Extra Relic 1CP
Divine chorous 2CP
Ryzaphron 5CP
Dragoon 1CP +1 per round of combat
Infiltrators 2CP
Corpuscarii 2CP
Stygies strat on HQ 1CP
Kastelan Strat 1CP
(and thats what you use by T2 currently without luxuries

factoring detatchments your spending 22/ out of 14 by T2

Or Aggripinaa build
Agripinaa strat 12CP alone
(+ the rest)


Stygies + knight build
Knight +WL/Relic 5 CP
Extra WL 3 CP
Extra Relic 1 CP
divine chorus 2CP
knight of the cog 1CP
Corpuscarii 2 CP
kastellan strat 1CP
Dragoon 1 CP +1 per round of combat

17/11 by T2

U02dah4 wrote:
thats not CP Hungry thats workable

CP Hungry is admech by comparison

Mixed subfaction build

Extra WL 3CP
Extra Relic 1CP
Divine chorous 2CP
Ryzaphron 5CP
Dragoon 1CP +1 per round of combat
Infiltrators 2CP
Corpuscarii 2CP
Stygies strat on HQ 1CP
Kastelan Strat 1CP
(and thats what you use by T2 currently without luxuries

factoring detatchments your spending 22/ out of 14 by T2

Or Aggripinaa build
Agripinaa strat 12CP alone
(+ the rest)


Stygies + knight build
Knight +WL/Relic 5 CP
Extra WL 3 CP
Extra Relic 1 CP
divine chorus 2CP
knight of the cog 1CP
Corpuscarii 2 CP
kastellan strat 1CP
Dragoon 1 CP +1 per round of combat

17/11 by T2

Well you could have made this a caveat, as in “compared to other factions, Sisters isn’t a CP hungry faction.” Regardless of how much more CP other factions use, Sisters are still a CP- hungry faction. You allow the remaining 3 or 4 to-start CP for one strat (for Seraphim), what about us other players who like to use the other 30 or so Strats not to mention Prepared positions or one of the other universal Strats? And now we’ve got to factor in CP usage for outflanking, it just doesn’t really give us much to play with.
I think GW will eventually add more CP to start just like they bumped up the amount of CP for the different detachments in early 8th.

I don't see this as a big problem. You've got a CP budget, if you want to spend it on the situational in-game strats don't spend it all on pre-game strats. Can't have your cake and eat it too.

Sisters are in a decently advantageous position over all in the new system because they can make good brigades for the primary detachment. Many other are pretty stuck by expensive/bad options in some of the battlefield roles or are much more limited by going with a single subfaction.

rbstr wrote:
I don't see this as a big problem. You've got a CP budget, if you want to spend it on the situational in-game strats don't spend it all on pre-game strats. Can't have your cake and eat it too.

Sisters are in a decently advantageous position over all in the new system because they can make good brigades for the primary detachment. Many other are pretty stuck by expensive/bad options in some of the battlefield roles or are much more limited by going with a single subfaction.

Exactly. The idea that CP should be readily available for you to do everything you want goes against the entire concept of it being a finite, valuable, and limited resources.

Also md dice ease up on cp need. Less need for cp rerolling those to hit and to wound rolls

Some things are definitely getting cut. Not going to bother with double imagifier buffs outside of bloody rose, haven't liked heroine since the new book dropped. Fixing Sacred Rites isn't really worth the CP anymore, better to just pick 1 you know you'll actually use.

Hopefully fortifications are free and/or outriders/spearheads are only 1CP because our biggest loss would be not being able to mix and match Convictions. And the battle sanctum is only getting better as time goes on.

Lemondish wrote:

rbstr wrote:
I don't see this as a big problem. You've got a CP budget, if you want to spend it on the situational in-game strats don't spend it all on pre-game strats. Can't have your cake and eat it too.

Sisters are in a decently advantageous position over all in the new system because they can make good brigades for the primary detachment. Many other are pretty stuck by expensive/bad options in some of the battlefield roles or are much more limited by going with a single subfaction.

Exactly. The idea that CP should be readily available for you to do everything you want goes against the entire concept of it being a finite, valuable, and limited resources.

My argument through all this is that we (and other horde and non-elite factions) are getting a CP cut in the name of “CP balance”, yet those factions that are getting more CP at our expense are the factions that are already doing well, namely SM and other elite factions. So I guess since the consensus here seems to be “get over it” I’ll just feel ok with getting screwed, again.

tneva82 wrote:
Well for me It's basically wash. Brigade+vanquard=16 CP vs 18 in 9th ed. bat+bat+vanquard even less. So I'm less worried about that. I'm more worried about already broken good marines getting buff over buff over buff over buff over buff over buff...there's not been anything BAD for marines so far...

In otherwords got 3 game tournament with sister. Albeit casual 1k so not biggest reveals. Triumph was used for funs and it actually performed quite well. 1st game taking on damaged knight(12 wounds by single exorcist, 1 wound by lone sister superior just for lolz) before Triumph got around. With her relic and all the MD's and whatnot I got the knight down to 3 wounds. By all rights my 16 wound triumph should have survived the 2 combat rounds(he averages 10 damage assuming I use no MD on 2nd combat round) but dice cometh, dice giveth.

2nd game I was subjected to marine fire on super sparse board and then went on duel with invictor warsuit but was actually winning that one!

And on 3rd game most of ork force focused on her for couple rounds as I was deleting elements and she was still on last bracket at the end.

18 wounds, 4++, -1 to hit and with MD's fairly easy 2-3 saves quaranteed per phase made triumph surprisingly resilient.

That's not being completely honest, they suffered some pretty big nerfs too.

They are now an aurahammer faction with the worst units to protect the chars, this is going to matter a lot in 9th.

They loved 10 man intercessors, which now get extra damage from the blast rule, while at the same time not gaining much advantage from the blast rule,

Repulsors can now be bad touched.

They had the second strongest overwatch after T'au sept lists, which now is mostly gone.

Strategic reserves allows the opponent to play around the doctrine turns and limit the advantages they have.


There is a lot changing and marines are not getting out of this unscathed. There are factions which are getting the shorter end of the stick sure, but marines are not getting a free pass either.
The chapter that is getting the best deal right now are the ultramarines.

Spoletta makes great points. I'd also like to mention the points changes will have a decent impact on everybody in a way that we can't fully know yet.

Though a Repulsor getting bad touched doesn't sound like much of an issue for them - they're bristling with both anti-infantry and anti-tank weaponry.

This does feel like a balancing move, and the game could do with more balance. I'm realizing that to run multi-faction builds (or inter-faction soup builds, or possibly lists with fortifications) will be more of a decisive commitment of resources than a casual fun twist or a power play. I'll probably still run VH+BR at times, but there's a strong case being made for mono armies given all the different ways to sink CP. Maybe even a case for mono-Brigades given what seems like a sweet spot in terms of PPM for Sisters. So I'm ultimately feeling okay about it, but it was a slight shock to internalize the change.

It feels like an un-balancing move - being a decisive commitment of resources it will either be a power play or you won't see it.

Which shuts down a lot of variability. Or punish people for trying something fun and unconventional

Sure GW probably believe its balancing but we have just come from one of the most balanced editions (by the end). Changing so much will more likely have the opposite impact

Edition where best faction has almost twice the win rate of worst ones is hardly balanced.

Its not that bad the majority of armies have been +-10% your never going to get perfect balance

tneva82 wrote:
Edition where best faction has almost twice the win rate of worst ones is hardly balanced.

The SM 2.0 Codex is where things got skewed outta whack with them, before that release 8th was in the best spot I’ve ever seen - and I’ve been playing since 1997.

A Sister of Battle on the run and a mysterious Alien - together they fight Chaos...... A new series coming to Netflix soon!



Looks like you can still use the following strats on her:

Moment of Grace,
Heroine in the Making (likey to be faqed away)
Divine Intervention
Holy Rage
Suffer not the Witch
Purity of Faith
Judgement of the Faithful

As a Sisters character she’s able to take relics (unless FAQ’d). I could see her take the Emps Wrath to replace her bolt pistol, or you could make her a good melee character and give her the Iron Surplice for a 2+/4++/5+++ (near Kyganil) and ignores wound rolls of 1-3.
So the question is, are they worth 115 points??

 davidgr33n wrote:
So the question is, are they worth 115 points??

and will they still be 115pts when 9th edition drops....

I'm more interested in exactly how Unexpected Allies works.

1. I assume the intent is if you take Fallen you can't take Stern and Kyganil at all, but that's not how the ability is worded.

2. If you do bring Fallen, how much of the ability turns off? If it's just the first sentence, which is what the grammatical reading says, then the pair can be included in any Imperium detachment as an HQ slot but the rest of the ability still applies

3. If the entire ability turns off, there's nothing prohibiting you from bringing them in an Auxiliary detachment for 1CP.

 davidgr33n wrote:
As a Sisters character she’s able to take relics (unless FAQ’d). I could see her take the Emps Wrath to replace her bolt pistol, or you could make her a good melee character and give her the Iron Surplice for a 2+/4++/5+++ (near Kyganil) and ignores wound rolls of 1-3.
So the question is, are they worth 115 points??

Not sure about Relics as she is a Named Character so that would rule her out.

Ahhh, correct - I’d forgotten about that.

IMO there’s better uses for 115 points, and I don’t think those points will change as I’m sure GW anticipated 9th coming out right afterwards.

 davidgr33n wrote:
Ahhh, correct - I’d forgotten about that.

IMO there’s better uses for 115 points, and I don’t think those points will change as I’m sure GW anticipated 9th coming out right afterwards.

yeah but do they care?? Some of the PA traits I belive are already invalidated by new terrian etc rules.

I'll get here cos I said I would get all the Sisters Models and I have

Seems Tac Marines are going up 3 pts from 12 to 15 pts. If this points increase holds true (intercessors went up 3 points) and basic Battle Sisters go up to 12 points or even 11 points I’m going to be pretty salty going into 9th. Two basic sisters at 24 points wouldn’t compare to 1 intercessor at 20 points.

Going to 15 from 12 pts for tac marines represents proportionally a lesser increase in pts than for a sister to go to 12 from 9 pts. It would be verry unfair.

At first sight, the point increase is a loss for Battle Sisters but we have to keep in sight that 9th ed tend to diminish the importance of cheap troops to aim at multiplying battalion detachment in order to get free CP. Supposing that only the first battalion is free (CP refunded) while in parallel the next ones not only don't give you more CP but cost you some, you will certainly not try to multiply the battalion. Hence the lack of usefulness of the basic sister in 9th ed comparing to 8th ed.

In 8th, I can fit two battalion detachement in 1000pts without too much pain, it even becomes quite easy on 1250pts games. It won't be possible in 9th ed no matter the price of the basic sisters, so I won't play this datasheet as often as I was before.

While dissapointing as a multi army player tac marines are weaker than tacs it is not that unfair for them to be rebalanced however intercessors do not need a buff

If it's 11 Battle sisters should be fine. If it's 12 don't run them more than you have to.

 ierp wrote:
Going to 15 from 12 pts for tac marines represents proportionally a lesser increase in pts than for a sister to go to 12 from 9 pts. It would be verry unfair.

At first sight, the point increase is a loss for Battle Sisters but we have to keep in sight that 9th ed tend to diminish the importance of cheap troops to aim at multiplying battalion detachment in order to get free CP. Supposing that only the first battalion is free (CP refunded) while in parallel the next ones not only don't give you more CP but cost you some, you will certainly not try to multiply the battalion. Hence the lack of usefulness of the basic sister in 9th ed comparing to 8th ed.

In 8th, I can fit two battalion detachement in 1000pts without too much pain, it even becomes quite easy on 1250pts games. It won't be possible in 9th ed no matter the price of the basic sisters, so I won't play this datasheet as often as I was before.

Depending on points, I can see brigade being the standard Sisters detachment - which requires the same number of troops

 davidgr33n wrote:
Ahhh, correct - I’d forgotten about that.

IMO there’s better uses for 115 points, and I don’t think those points will change as I’m sure GW anticipated 9th coming out right afterwards.

115 points? Holy crap are they terrible. You can get more output from 2 canonesses for less points and still get the reroll bubble.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Lammia wrote:

 ierp wrote:
Going to 15 from 12 pts for tac marines represents proportionally a lesser increase in pts than for a sister to go to 12 from 9 pts. It would be verry unfair.

At first sight, the point increase is a loss for Battle Sisters but we have to keep in sight that 9th ed tend to diminish the importance of cheap troops to aim at multiplying battalion detachment in order to get free CP. Supposing that only the first battalion is free (CP refunded) while in parallel the next ones not only don't give you more CP but cost you some, you will certainly not try to multiply the battalion. Hence the lack of usefulness of the basic sister in 9th ed comparing to 8th ed.

In 8th, I can fit two battalion detachement in 1000pts without too much pain, it even becomes quite easy on 1250pts games. It won't be possible in 9th ed no matter the price of the basic sisters, so I won't play this datasheet as often as I was before.

Depending on points, I can see brigade being the standard Sisters detachment - which requires the same number of troops

Unless the brigade is +CP I can't see anyone ever taking on again.

The reason would be that you want extra slots of a particular type without spending CP on an extra detatchment -

The key thing will be points which we dont know yet and the tourney standard.

The ITC are backing 2000. However a large portion ofe the UK scene isn't ITC and if people want to stick with 6×4 then higher points might be recommended.

U02dah4 wrote:
The reason would be that you want extra slots of a particular type without spending CP on an extra detatchment -

The key thing will be points which we dont know yet and the tourney standard.

The ITC are backing 2000. However a large portion ofe the UK scene isn't ITC and if people want to stick with 6×4 then higher points might be recommended.

No one is going over 2k points. Especially in the UK where people already play smaller games in a lot of areas due to travel constraints. People who think the difference in board size is enough to prompt bigger games on 6x4 are severely overestimating the across the board points bump. Unless they really do want 4 hour games.

As for the rest, I know the reasons, i just can't see an army that wants 3 more troop units AND 2 more FA enough for it to not be worth the CP to just add a patrol.

Think about it for Sisters, to get a brigade you're spending 100 extra points on troops(2 more squads than the patrol) you probably don't want, as well as forgoing any chance to effectively mix and match your order convictions. Since you're taking the brigade for more slots anyway, you clearly want more of a specific force org slot, which mixing and matching will always favor one Conviction over another.

It seems like 2CP would be a fair trade off to save 100pts and get bloody rose seraphim instead of valorous heart seraphim.

I used to run a VH brigade with a BR detachment in 8th. With the way things are looking I’m planning to run a BR battalion with just 3 troops this edition.
I mainly fill up my elite slot, and since I think melee is going to be the best option for Sisters this edition, we might get some use out of Arco-flagellants since they don’t take up an elite slot if you bring a min priest (which I do). The main down side to Arcos will be losing models on failed 1s in the morale test, in addition to not being able to use MD.

 davidgr33n wrote:
I used to run a VH brigade with a BR detachment in 8th. With the way things are looking I’m planning to run a BR battalion with just 3 troops this edition.
I mainly fill up my elite slot, and since I think melee is going to be the best option for Sisters this edition, we might get some use out of Arco-flagellants since they don’t take up an elite slot if you bring a min priest (which I do). The main down side to Arcos will be losing models on failed 1s in the morale test, in addition to not being able to use MD.

take a missionary or a hospitaller to heal/prevent running away?

 davidgr33n wrote:
Seems Tac Marines are going up 3 pts from 12 to 15 pts. If this points increase holds true (intercessors went up 3 points) and basic Battle Sisters go up to 12 points or even 11 points I’m going to be pretty salty going into 9th. Two basic sisters at 24 points wouldn’t compare to 1 intercessor at 20 points.

Any source for that besides the 4chan guy who also said you could still fall back and shoot?

 davidgr33n wrote:
I used to run a VH brigade with a BR detachment in 8th. With the way things are looking I’m planning to run a BR battalion with just 3 troops this edition.
I mainly fill up my elite slot, and since I think melee is going to be the best option for Sisters this edition, we might get some use out of Arco-flagellants since they don’t take up an elite slot if you bring a min priest (which I do). The main down side to Arcos will be losing models on failed 1s in the morale test, in addition to not being able to use MD.

In my opinion, if melee is the best option it'll be mortifiers and pengines, not arcos or repentia. The new coherency rules make running 6-10 man units much more difficult and the new Look Out Sir rules make running priests almost impossible. On the opposite side, Morties are likely to get an update to at least their flamer rule and both benefit heavily from the smaller boards and the outflank rules. Add to that that nothing seems to be changing how mediocre rhinos are or how terrible immolators are and we're looking at a renaissance period for SoB walkers.

ERJAK wrote:

 davidgr33n wrote:
I used to run a VH brigade with a BR detachment in 8th. With the way things are looking I’m planning to run a BR battalion with just 3 troops this edition.
I mainly fill up my elite slot, and since I think melee is going to be the best option for Sisters this edition, we might get some use out of Arco-flagellants since they don’t take up an elite slot if you bring a min priest (which I do). The main down side to Arcos will be losing models on failed 1s in the morale test, in addition to not being able to use MD.

In my opinion, if melee is the best option it'll be mortifiers and pengines, not arcos or repentia. The new coherency rules make running 6-10 man units much more difficult and the new Look Out Sir rules make running priests almost impossible. On the opposite side, Morties are likely to get an update to at least their flamer rule and both benefit heavily from the smaller boards and the outflank rules. Add to that that nothing seems to be changing how mediocre rhinos are or how terrible immolators are and we're looking at a renaissance period for SoB walkers.

I've found squads of 3 and 4 enough for Arcos and Repentia. The new screening rules will present some challenges to priests, but honestly not a lot more than they already face when left exposed

 davidgr33n wrote:
Ahhh, correct - I’d forgotten about that.

IMO there’s better uses for 115 points, and I don’t think those points will change as I’m sure GW anticipated 9th coming out right afterwards.

Sister book, PA books etc were written for 8th. Forget the marketing speech they were written with 9th ed in mind. Too much stuff flat out made useless in 9th ed for that. It's marketing speech. Does it sound better "they were written with 9th ed in mind" or "your book gets lots of it invalidated in few months"?

Any book supposedly written 9th in mind there would not a) have rules made redundant(looking at you mortificators or AM canticle...), bonuses for staying mono etc.

tneva82 wrote:

 davidgr33n wrote:
Ahhh, correct - I’d forgotten about that.

IMO there’s better uses for 115 points, and I don’t think those points will change as I’m sure GW anticipated 9th coming out right afterwards.

Sister book, PA books etc were written for 8th. Forget the marketing speech they were written with 9th ed in mind. Too much stuff flat out made useless in 9th ed for that. It's marketing speech. Does it sound better "they were written with 9th ed in mind" or "your book gets lots of it invalidated in few months"?

Any book supposedly written 9th in mind there would not a) have rules made redundant(looking at you mortificators or AM canticle...), bonuses for staying mono etc.

According to the leaks, she went up 10 points already despite being pretty bad at 115.

Speaking of being really bad, the immolator, based on the razorback which is the same price chassis, is going up 25 points for the multimelta version. Which, by itself makes me a lot less optimistic about this edition. The fact that eradicators are only 40pts is just salt in the wound.

ANd feth, heavy bolters went up on vehicles(despite being crap) so Twin HB immos went up 18points on just the heavy bolters and HB morties went up 10 right off the bat.

ERJAK wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 davidgr33n wrote:
Ahhh, correct - I’d forgotten about that.

IMO there’s better uses for 115 points, and I don’t think those points will change as I’m sure GW anticipated 9th coming out right afterwards.

Sister book, PA books etc were written for 8th. Forget the marketing speech they were written with 9th ed in mind. Too much stuff flat out made useless in 9th ed for that. It's marketing speech. Does it sound better "they were written with 9th ed in mind" or "your book gets lots of it invalidated in few months"?

Any book supposedly written 9th in mind there would not a) have rules made redundant(looking at you mortificators or AM canticle...), bonuses for staying mono etc.

According to the leaks, she went up 10 points already despite being pretty bad at 115.

Speaking of being really bad, the immolator, based on the razorback which is the same price chassis, is going up 25 points for the multimelta version. Which, by itself makes me a lot less optimistic about this edition. The fact that eradicators are only 40pts is just salt in the wound.

ANd feth, heavy bolters went up on vehicles(despite being crap) so Twin HB immos went up 18points on just the heavy bolters and HB morties went up 10 right off the bat.

Srsly??? I already didn’t care for Stern even at 115. But the eradicators are too cheap for what they do and if what you’re saying re: heavy Bolters and Mortifiers, yea color me VERY SALTY

I had just painted all my Mortifiers and the rest of my revised list from 8th, not really looking forward to 9th at this point.

And this just in: exorcist launchers (both varieties) confirmed to be blast weapons

 davidgr33n wrote:

ERJAK wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 davidgr33n wrote:
Ahhh, correct - I’d forgotten about that.

IMO there’s better uses for 115 points, and I don’t think those points will change as I’m sure GW anticipated 9th coming out right afterwards.

Sister book, PA books etc were written for 8th. Forget the marketing speech they were written with 9th ed in mind. Too much stuff flat out made useless in 9th ed for that. It's marketing speech. Does it sound better "they were written with 9th ed in mind" or "your book gets lots of it invalidated in few months"?

Any book supposedly written 9th in mind there would not a) have rules made redundant(looking at you mortificators or AM canticle...), bonuses for staying mono etc.

According to the leaks, she went up 10 points already despite being pretty bad at 115.

Speaking of being really bad, the immolator, based on the razorback which is the same price chassis, is going up 25 points for the multimelta version. Which, by itself makes me a lot less optimistic about this edition. The fact that eradicators are only 40pts is just salt in the wound.

ANd feth, heavy bolters went up on vehicles(despite being crap) so Twin HB immos went up 18points on just the heavy bolters and HB morties went up 10 right off the bat.

Srsly??? I already didn’t care for Stern even at 115. But the eradicators are too cheap for what they do and if what you’re saying re: heavy Bolters and Mortifiers, yea color me VERY SALTY

I had just painted all my Mortifiers and the rest of my revised list from 8th, not really looking forward to 9th at this point.

And this just in: exorcist launchers (both varieties) confirmed to be blast weapons

A lascannon is now FIVE POINTS CHEAPER than a multimelta, and only 5 points more expensive than a meltagun on infantry. Which doesn't make any goddam sense considering that the lascannon has always been the superior weapon.

ERJAK wrote:

 davidgr33n wrote:

ERJAK wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 davidgr33n wrote:
Ahhh, correct - I’d forgotten about that.

IMO there’s better uses for 115 points, and I don’t think those points will change as I’m sure GW anticipated 9th coming out right afterwards.

Sister book, PA books etc were written for 8th. Forget the marketing speech they were written with 9th ed in mind. Too much stuff flat out made useless in 9th ed for that. It's marketing speech. Does it sound better "they were written with 9th ed in mind" or "your book gets lots of it invalidated in few months"?

Any book supposedly written 9th in mind there would not a) have rules made redundant(looking at you mortificators or AM canticle...), bonuses for staying mono etc.

According to the leaks, she went up 10 points already despite being pretty bad at 115.

Speaking of being really bad, the immolator, based on the razorback which is the same price chassis, is going up 25 points for the multimelta version. Which, by itself makes me a lot less optimistic about this edition. The fact that eradicators are only 40pts is just salt in the wound.

ANd feth, heavy bolters went up on vehicles(despite being crap) so Twin HB immos went up 18points on just the heavy bolters and HB morties went up 10 right off the bat.

Srsly??? I already didn’t care for Stern even at 115. But the eradicators are too cheap for what they do and if what you’re saying re: heavy Bolters and Mortifiers, yea color me VERY SALTY

I had just painted all my Mortifiers and the rest of my revised list from 8th, not really looking forward to 9th at this point.

And this just in: exorcist launchers (both varieties) confirmed to be blast weapons

A lascannon is now FIVE POINTS CHEAPER than a multimelta, and only 5 points more expensive than a meltagun on infantry. Which doesn't make any goddam sense considering that the lascannon has always been the superior weapon.

All depends if the rumour that Multi-Meltas are two shots now turns out to be true or not.

 Asmodai wrote:

ERJAK wrote:

 davidgr33n wrote:

ERJAK wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 davidgr33n wrote:
Ahhh, correct - I’d forgotten about that.

IMO there’s better uses for 115 points, and I don’t think those points will change as I’m sure GW anticipated 9th coming out right afterwards.

Sister book, PA books etc were written for 8th. Forget the marketing speech they were written with 9th ed in mind. Too much stuff flat out made useless in 9th ed for that. It's marketing speech. Does it sound better "they were written with 9th ed in mind" or "your book gets lots of it invalidated in few months"?

Any book supposedly written 9th in mind there would not a) have rules made redundant(looking at you mortificators or AM canticle...), bonuses for staying mono etc.

According to the leaks, she went up 10 points already despite being pretty bad at 115.

Speaking of being really bad, the immolator, based on the razorback which is the same price chassis, is going up 25 points for the multimelta version. Which, by itself makes me a lot less optimistic about this edition. The fact that eradicators are only 40pts is just salt in the wound.

ANd feth, heavy bolters went up on vehicles(despite being crap) so Twin HB immos went up 18points on just the heavy bolters and HB morties went up 10 right off the bat.

Srsly??? I already didn’t care for Stern even at 115. But the eradicators are too cheap for what they do and if what you’re saying re: heavy Bolters and Mortifiers, yea color me VERY SALTY

I had just painted all my Mortifiers and the rest of my revised list from 8th, not really looking forward to 9th at this point.

And this just in: exorcist launchers (both varieties) confirmed to be blast weapons

A lascannon is now FIVE POINTS CHEAPER than a multimelta, and only 5 points more expensive than a meltagun on infantry. Which doesn't make any goddam sense considering that the lascannon has always been the superior weapon.

All depends if the rumour that Multi-Meltas are two shots now turns out to be true or not.

I hadn't heard that one. Where's that from? Because that's a whole different ballgame.

Assuming people play on the smaller board size melta weapons will be in range sooner than currently in 8th so maybe that is why the melta now costs more (if the leak is true) than lascannon.

12” range with 6” range for “pick one” is still pretty short range

They are essentially 24" assault 2 with the shoot twice ability from the repulsor.

jivardi wrote:
Assuming people play on the smaller board size melta weapons will be in range sooner than currently in 8th so maybe that is why the melta now costs more (if the leak is true) than lascannon.

That doesn't really make much of a difference though. The range issue is only part of why the Lascannon is better. Being S9 rather than AP-4 is quite a lot better thanks to all the invuls kicking around and Melta as a rule is almost totally irrelevant.

Meh, that leak could be as fake as a $3 bill. If it is a fake it's a good one but I take all leaks NOT from GW or on the WHC website with a grain of salt.

I dunno,Spikey bits has been just about 100% on their 9th edition leaks.

Looks like the Battle Sanctum(s) does not cost us any CP - costs 1 but get it back if its of you won faction.

 Mr Morden wrote:
Looks like the Battle Sanctum(s) does not cost us any CP - costs 1 but get it back if its of you won faction.

Spoiler:

Well thats something... but at the same time i now have to pay CP if i want to run bunkers/trenches and the battle sanctum.... which gw still hasnt shipped to me XD, but at least i can run the sanctum by itself whenever it comes..

Ever since they let out that CP was changing and we’d be getting less I’ve had a bad feeling about 9th. I was fairly happy with the direction of 8th.

 Mr Morden wrote:
Looks like the Battle Sanctum(s) does not cost us any CP - costs 1 but get it back if its of you won faction.

Spoiler:

RAW that costs us 1 CP

The pious and penitent exemption does not apply to battle sanctums.

The battle sanctum is taken in an adeptus ministorum detatchment which is unlikely to be the same as your warlords detatchment which will be order of the bloody rose or valorous heart.

Does it Work if St C is your Warlord?

If your detatchment was adeptus ministorum then yes


If your detatchment was adeptus sororitas No

But I think the YMDC thread would argue on that one because similar issues have created two distinct interpretations.

Tournaments like ITC events that require you to specify detatchments keywords and your detatchment is bloody rose (1CP) VS The strictest RAW where your detatchment is adeptus ministorum, adeptus sororitas and bloody rose at the same time (0CP)

(I wouldn't worry about it because detatchment definitions might change or it would likely be FAQ'd just worth noteing).

Ironically the unaligned fortifications can be taken in a bloody rose detatchment so wouldn't cost a CP

U02dah4 wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:
Looks like the Battle Sanctum(s) does not cost us any CP - costs 1 but get it back if its of you won faction.

Spoiler:

RAW that costs us 1 CP

The pious and penitent exemption does not apply to battle sanctums.

The battle sanctum is taken in an adeptus ministorum detatchment which is unlikely to be the same as your warlords detatchment which will be order of the bloody rose or valorous heart.

An Adepta Sororitas detachment is also a Adeptus Minstrorum Detachment and an Imperium detachment. If the Battle Sanctum is your only Fortification, the detachment will be free CP-wise.

U02dah4 wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:
Looks like the Battle Sanctum(s) does not cost us any CP - costs 1 but get it back if its of you won faction.

Spoiler:

RAW that costs us 1 CP

The pious and penitent exemption does not apply to battle sanctums.

The battle sanctum is taken in an adeptus ministorum detatchment which is unlikely to be the same as your warlords detatchment which will be order of the bloody rose or valorous heart.

Pretty sure this is wrong. It's about keywords.

A bloody rose detachment is an adepta sororitas detachment, is an imperial detachment, is an adeptus ministorum detachment, so long as every unit in the detachment shares these keywords. Nothing in the rules I've seen says you lose adeptus ministorum by picking Valorous Heart or bloody rose. Same way you don't lose 'space marine' for being Ironhands.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 alextroy wrote:

U02dah4 wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:
Looks like the Battle Sanctum(s) does not cost us any CP - costs 1 but get it back if its of you won faction.

Spoiler:

RAW that costs us 1 CP

The pious and penitent exemption does not apply to battle sanctums.

The battle sanctum is taken in an adeptus ministorum detatchment which is unlikely to be the same as your warlords detatchment which will be order of the bloody rose or valorous heart.

An Adepta Sororitas detachment is also a Adeptus Minstrorum Detachment and an Imperium detachment. If the Battle Sanctum is your only Fortification, the detachment will be free CP-wise.

Which is awesome because the thing is a steal for 50pts. So long as it still provides cover. Not sure how that works yet, haven't read the whole rulebook.

As i said their are two interpretations and it has gone round and round on ymdc on other questions. Strict RAW your correct. However by many events house rules that require you to specify your detatchment keyword your not. Its worth being aware of but not worth turning a tactics thread into a rules debate (and one the rules lawyers disagree on)


Also they announced points are changeing why would you assume it stays at 50

Also the way they have worded terrain rules it is likely to be heavily faq'd but roughly do the same except not cover vehicles

Battle Brothers rule is gone, so as long as you're willing to give up detachment-level special rules (including stratagems), mix away. Although you can keep stratagems as long as you have at least one "pure" detachment.

In addition, sucks to play pure Sisters or other small armies in larger games. Rule of 3 is now hard codified and doesn't care what points level you're playing at, the maximum number of non-troops, non-DT datasheets you can bring by name is 3.

Did they change the disembark rule? From what I've seen in the spoilers it now mentions that if a unit disembarked that turn it counts as having moved. If that's the case is there a point in bringing repentia in Rhinos since they either have to hop out in charge range or drive up in their rhino and hope no one pops it?

There's a more explicit state that's something to the effect of "this unit stood still and didn't move". I forget the exact naming.

So basically you don't get to count as "stood still" if you get out of a transport. Like if you're infantry with a heavy weapon you're gonna take the -1 to hit for "moving".
You can still get out of a transport and then move in most cases.

Stuff that comes in via deepstrike-like abilities is also counted as having moved. This does stuff like preventing a Leman Russ from double-shooting if it was deployed from Strategic Reserves.

U02dah4 wrote:
As i said their are two interpretations and it has gone round and round on ymdc on other questions. Strict RAW your correct. However by many events house rules that require you to specify your detatchment keyword your not. Its worth being aware of but not worth turning a tactics thread into a rules debate (and one the rules lawyers disagree on)


Also they announced points are changeing why would you assume it stays at 50

Also the way they have worded terrain rules it is likely to be heavily faq'd but roughly do the same except not cover vehicles

Because it's 50 now. Hellblasters are the same, why wouldn't the battle sanctum?

Out of curiousity, what events require you to specify your detachment keyword? I know Adepticon doesn't, Nova doesn't, LVO doesn't. Is it an ETC thing?

rbstr wrote:
There's a more explicit state that's something to the effect of "this unit stood still and didn't move". I forget the exact naming.

So basically you don't get to count as "stood still" if you get out of a transport. Like if you're infantry with a heavy weapon you're gonna take the -1 to hit for "moving".
You can still get out of a transport and then move in most cases.

Stuff that comes in via deepstrike-like abilities is also counted as having moved. This does stuff like preventing a Leman Russ from double-shooting if it was deployed from Strategic Reserves.

Does it say counting moved full speed? As russ can move halfspeed and shoot twice

tneva82 wrote:

rbstr wrote:
There's a more explicit state that's something to the effect of "this unit stood still and didn't move". I forget the exact naming.

So basically you don't get to count as "stood still" if you get out of a transport. Like if you're infantry with a heavy weapon you're gonna take the -1 to hit for "moving".
You can still get out of a transport and then move in most cases.

Stuff that comes in via deepstrike-like abilities is also counted as having moved. This does stuff like preventing a Leman Russ from double-shooting if it was deployed from Strategic Reserves.

Does it say counting moved full speed? As russ can move halfspeed and shoot twice

Not 100% sure but most of the rules that say a unit counts as having moved say it counts as having moved a value equal to its movement characteristic.

ERJAK wrote:

U02dah4 wrote:
As i said their are two interpretations and it has gone round and round on ymdc on other questions. Strict RAW your correct. However by many events house rules that require you to specify your detatchment keyword your not. Its worth being aware of but not worth turning a tactics thread into a rules debate (and one the rules lawyers disagree on)


Also they announced points are changeing why would you assume it stays at 50

Also the way they have worded terrain rules it is likely to be heavily faq'd but roughly do the same except not cover vehicles

Because it's 50 now. Hellblasters are the same, why wouldn't the battle sanctum?

Out of curiousity, what events require you to specify your detachment keyword? I know Adepticon doesn't, Nova doesn't, LVO doesn't. Is it an ETC thing?

Yes under ETC formatting or simplified formating e.g. London GT or most Scottish events.

I cant speak to American events - its a little far to travel

If a unit starts embarked in a Transport model that unit can disembark so long as the model did not make a normal move, advance move, or fallen back.

Disembark wholly within 3" of Transport model. The unit may act as normal (move, shoot, charge, etc) but the disembarked unit counts as having moved even if you don't move further (so heavies will fire at -1 to hit even if you don't move the squad after disembark.

So transport moves, even 1/4 inch, you can't disembark a unit inside. If transport is stationary you can disembark and do normal stuff.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Hmm, woods have Defensible and Dense Terrain traits.

5 Stormbolter Dominions of VH will be difficult to shift.

-1 to hit in most scenarios and if they get charged I can choose to either get +1 to hit in melee or 5+ overwatch.

Marines are hitting on 4's (assuming no pluses to hit) and then the girls have 3+ save against most of the guns. Stick an imagifier nearby and they more or less negate plasma ap and other ap2 nonsense.

I need Imperial Statues for my Sisters. +1 to Armor Save and +1 to Morale check if near the statue. 2+ save ignoring ap-1 and possibly ap-2 is juicy.

Plasma is -3. Vh useless vs it

tneva82 wrote:
Plasma is -3. Vh useless vs it

Still, -1 to hit them is good not to mention almost every game I play the battlefield has trees on it.

I play mono VH so the Order is still good and -2 with Imagifier still negates the menace of most the basic weapons in the game

Firing OW on 5+ with 16 shots is better than firing OW on 6+.

Also legends isn't that commonly allowed anymore so 4 sb

woo hoo. got all the 9th edition rules and Im ready to roxor. hi-lites:

Only Titanic units can fall back and still shoot or use Psyker powers. None can charge after falling back. Big nerf for the Fly rule.

Disembarkation is WHOLLY within 3”.

Cannot heroically intervene when blown out of a Rhino.

You can’t embark engaged transports! Big change.

You must manifest ALL your Psyker powers in a unit before moving on to the next unit. This should be less chaotic.

Charges are all or nothing: you MUST reach ALL targets or you reach zero targets in a charge.

Monsters and vehicle MODELS can fire non-Blast weapons at engaged units that are within Engagement range of that MODEL. Heavy Weapons are at –1 to hit in that situation.

Characters can now b eshot if there isn’t a unit with three models, or a Vehicle or a monster within 3”, when the character isnt the closest target.

BLAST WEAPONS: Minimum of 3 shots on targets of 6-10 models, and maximum shots on 11+ units.

You cannot shoot people “out of range” of your succeeding weapons fire within the unit. Once range is good, it’s good.

Vastly reduced number of attacks in combat since you will only ever be able to fight “two deep” at the best of times. Engagement range is 1/2 inch of 1/2 inch.

UNmodified 1’s always miss & wound, and unmodified 6’s always hit & wound.

UNmodified 1’s always pass morale checks.

Hit/Wound rolls can never be modified by more than +/- 1

Combat Attrition: if you fail morale, lose one model and then roll a die for every model there is. on 1’s, models vanish. It’s 1’s or 2’s if the unit is below half strength when you make the check.

You can no longer control multiple objectives with one unit. You must declare which one you plan to control.

Objective Secured is officially back in name as well as function.

Interesting. So you pay CP for even your FIRST Detachment from the 12 you start with...but then it gives you those points if'n yer Warlord is from that detachment. So there is a pretty strong motivation to use a singular detachment. Supreme Command detachment is free. Bit odd.

Command Re-roll is now STRICTLY for Hitting, wounding, damage, saves, Advance, charge, Psyker tests, number of shots fired, and Denying. No more re-rolls for all the “other things” you might roll for in your army... hm. So for example I cannot re-roll Celestines Ressurection roll, nor the roll for, say, my Sacred Rites that could change during a game. No more T’au re-rolls on say the Drone passing a save on to me.


Overwatch is now a 1 CP Stratagem, instead of being automatic.

To expand on what you said a bit further:

Command reroll roll forces you to reroll the entire test. Rolled a 6 and 1 and needed an 8? Can't just reroll the 1, you also have to reroll the 6. On the flip side, if you botched a deny test with snake eyes, you get to reroll both. Can't reroll FNP because it isn't a saving throw.

Insane courage is now a once per battle stratagem.

Battle brothers is still in the rules, you just have to dig to the Eternal War section to find it.

Supreme Command requires you make the model in that detachment your warlord and is only one unit now, thus why it's free.

 Jancoran wrote:
woo hoo. got all the 9th edition rules and Im ready to roxor. hi-lites:

Only Titanic units can fall back and still shoot or use Psyker powers. None can charge after falling back. Big nerf for the Fly rule.

Disembarkation is WHOLLY within 3”.

Cannot heroically intervene when blown out of a Rhino.

You can’t embark engaged transports! Big change.

You must manifest ALL your Psyker powers in a unit before moving on to the next unit. This should be less chaotic.

Charges are all or nothing: you MUST reach ALL targets or you reach zero targets in a charge.

Monsters and vehicle MODELS can fire non-Blast weapons at engaged units that are within Engagement range of that MODEL. Heavy Weapons are at –1 to hit in that situation.

Characters can now b eshot if there isn’t a unit with three models, or a Vehicle or a monster within 3”, when the character isnt the closest target.

BLAST WEAPONS: Minimum of 3 shots on targets of 6-10 models, and maximum shots on 11+ units.

You cannot shoot people “out of range” of your succeeding weapons fire within the unit. Once range is good, it’s good.

Vastly reduced number of attacks in combat since you will only ever be able to fight “two deep” at the best of times. Engagement range is 1/2 inch of 1/2 inch.

UNmodified 1’s always miss & wound, and unmodified 6’s always hit & wound.

UNmodified 1’s always pass morale checks.

Hit/Wound rolls can never be modified by more than +/- 1

Combat Attrition: if you fail morale, lose one model and then roll a die for every model there is. on 1’s, models vanish. It’s 1’s or 2’s if the unit is below half strength when you make the check.

You can no longer control multiple objectives with one unit. You must declare which one you plan to control.

Objective Secured is officially back in name as well as function.

Interesting. So you pay CP for even your FIRST Detachment from the 12 you start with...but then it gives you those points if'n yer Warlord is from that detachment. So there is a pretty strong motivation to use a singular detachment. Supreme Command detachment is free. Bit odd.

Command Re-roll is now STRICTLY for Hitting, wounding, damage, saves, Advance, charge, Psyker tests, number of shots fired, and Denying. No more re-rolls for all the “other things” you might roll for in your army... hm. So for example I cannot re-roll Celestines Ressurection roll, nor the roll for, say, my Sacred Rites that could change during a game. No more T’au re-rolls on say the Drone passing a save on to me.


Overwatch is now a 1 CP Stratagem, instead of being automatic.

first detachment is free for patrol, battalion, brigade if warlord is there not the others. supreme is a way to take your faction leader as effectively a free extra hq slot at the cost they must be your warlord and refund the cost of your patrol/battalion/brigade only. also no longer hq spam.

fortification network refunds the cp cost if every fortification matches your faction keyword.

And modifiers have now Nerfed our Repentias, so it’s str3 x 2 then add the 1, which makes our Repentia strength 7 instead
of STR8.
Massive nerf as my Repentia were the only things that could really deal with T8 or higher.

I’m not liking this edition and probably sit out again as I did during the Sisters beta Codex.

 davidgr33n wrote:
And modifiers have now Nerfed our Repentias, so it’s str3 x 2 then add the 1, which makes our Repentia strength 7 instead
of STR8.
Massive nerf as my Repentia were the only things that could really deal with T8 or higher.

I’m not liking this edition and probably sit out again as I did during the Sisters beta Codex.

explain? I missed that. Page number?

There's page on characteristic. They even use powerfist marine with +1 s buff as example to s9

 davidgr33n wrote:
I’m not liking this edition and probably sit out again as I did during the Sisters beta Codex.

If weaker repentia are the worst the sisters get then they are doing well. Points values will determine whether all of GWs testing has been to facilitate a good game all, or a good game for some.

Page 5, right column, free core rule book

 davidgr33n wrote:
Page 5, right column, free core rule book

So with the exception of reversing multiply and divide they are using standard order of operations in math?

Kinda makes sense.

I didn't play 6th or 7th but I know 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, and now 9th follow SOoO.

jivardi wrote:

So with the exception of reversing multiply and divide they are using standard order of operations in math?

Kinda makes sense.

I didn't play 6th or 7th but I know 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, and now 9th follow SOoO.

It makes sense mathematically - thematically, if a weapon doubles your strength, and you're hulking out, it seems logical that it would multiply your actual strength at that moment. It feels weird to apply the weapon modifier to your unmodified strength, then add 1. The weapon only doubles your natural strength? It somehow knows that a psychic spell is making your biceps bigger?

Game... atically, it hurts S3 models more than S4 models, which is... disappointing, given the meta at the end of 8th.

I noticed this as well reading through the new core rules and wanted to make sure it was different from 8th. Checked both the rulebook and the Errata, but both do multiplication, then addition. I believe I've seen the rule somewhere that would make a repentia S8 with the strength bonus, but I simply cannot find it. Does anyone remember where it was? I'm curious why GW decided to go back to the original order of modifiers in 8th, if they indeed changed them after publishing the book.

Us3Less wrote:
I noticed this as well reading through the new core rules and wanted to make sure it was different from 8th. Checked both the rulebook and the Errata, but both do multiplication, then addition. I believe I've seen the rule somewhere that would make a repentia S8 with the strength bonus, but I simply cannot find it. Does anyone remember where it was? I'm curious why GW decided to go back to the original order of modifiers in 8th, if they indeed changed them after publishing the book.

At some point GW decided modifiers to your stats happened before modifers from your weapon kicked in, so the strength buff from the imagifier happened before the x2 from the weapon. which seems to no longer apply for 9th.

Yeah that is a really tough one to take for Repentia

That batrep by TT showing off 9th with Tau and IF was a really good game.

Most important thing I took from it is that all 3 of those guys agree that scoring secondaries isn't as easy as some think. In the news and rumor portion of this site lots of people thinking that maxing out secondaries will be a cakewalk.

Neither player maxed their secondaries in last nights match-up

They played the 4 pillars mission. Needing to hold the objective to plant the flag through your opponents turn isn't that easy. If the unit gets shot off the board, the flag plant fails, if your opponent can get a unit within 3" of your flag they claim your flag and then they can attempt to plant their own flag. You don't need a unit to hang around to defend the flag (although that'd be dumb as hell not to) because once the flags are planted you get the VP at the end of your turn so long as your opponent doesn't move to within 3" of them.

The wonkiest part (and potentially slowest part) was the wound allocation. Once you allocate a wound to a model and it doesn't die all wounds inflicted on that unit for the REST OF THE TURN have to be allocated to that model until it dies. No tanking wounds with other models in a unit. Having to remember which model took the wounds in a unit first can be tricky if the unit the model is in faces lots of shooting and melee.

But overall I like what I see. TT have put up a Tau and SM tactics article. Tau OW is still really powerful but with the nerf to flying units it sort of balances.

The new missions are designed for a more mid-board game so armies that are good at castling, with how missions work in 9th, will not want to castle against the board edge. At some point your army will have to come in toward the middle.

Adrian pointed out that melee armies are less "move across the board and assault" but "move into the center, take objectives and hold them and when the enemy moves up to contest you counter-assault."

Also, MSU might be a thing for more durable armies but you want durable MSU for objective holding. 5 Battle Sisters are going to be worst at holding than 10 (even factoring in blast weapons). I think VH Sisters will have the easiest time in 9th with the missions.

That's why I expect secondaries that don't involve actions and staying alive for a turn be popular. You can pick them after all.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Tabletop tactics have sisters vs gsc. 2k and sister army was around 1700 in 8th ed according to people who have seen it. Condempor boltgun 5pts.

I can definitely say I'm glad I didn't go all-in on Repentia. Dodged a bullet there. Honestly they might still be okay with the BR stratagem, but they won't wreck Knights nearly as efficiently as before. Maybe GW decided that Repentia were OP for some reason?

Also, Condemnor Boltgun is 5 points now? Give me a break! That thing was worthless at 1 point.

Storm Bolters, assuming Sisters ones continue to cost the same as Space Marines ones, are going up to 3 points. Not a huge problem. We'll see how many points basic Sisters cost, though. Or have Sisters points values been leaked already?

Secondaries sure but every mission requires holding and taking objectives. Our T3 models can't take lots of punishment so expecting 5 Sisters to hold an objective all game, even as VH and in some kind of cover, is going to result in a loss.

Killing gak doesn't have a very big impact now. The playtesters have all said 9th is a mid board objective holding edition. Durability is going to be more important than offensiveness.

Well the obvious answer is dont just use 5 models to hold an objective

The second is what makes you think you need to hold it all game most games arnt won with maxed out scoreing

The third is that killing still stops your opponent scoreing if my opponent scores 55vp/100 because i killed 90% of his army i only need 56 to win

The 4th is that GW playtesters are notoriously bad GW playtesters did not see stormraven spam or Soup within detatchments, iron hands or the castellan within 8th yet they were kind of obvious. When they say this edition will be about X that assumes that their rules and design are what they think their rules and design are. (Which it never is)

With the nerfs to melee and the need for more durability, it’s looking like more of a win for VH and less so for Bloody Rose.

They need different builds but I think it's a little early to say for sure. VH certainly will have the advantage in terms of maximiseing your score but a well played BR may be better at reducing your opponents BR probably has a higher skill threshold though

As far as melee nerfs go I don't think they are too impactful (except against knights and you should win that match up anyway) I was mostly running MSU anyway so you didn't wrap and the ability to reserve celestine squads, smash connoness, mortifiers, and repentia are all huge potential gains to BR lists.

I mean the biggest change in my BR list (before points change is that for 2 CP my smash cannonness a 5 girl celestian squad with meltas, a min repentia and 3 mortifiers all DS) and thats a big improvement as its let me drop a rhino

tneva82 wrote:
That's why I expect secondaries that don't involve actions and staying alive for a turn be popular. You can pick them after all.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Tabletop tactics have sisters vs gsc. 2k and sister army was around 1700 in 8th ed according to people who have seen it. Condempor boltgun 5pts.

Neever mind everything that was previously here.

Dude does have about a 1700 point list of stuff that wasn't very good kicked up to 2000pts. This is gonna be bad if the marine leaks are true. 20% increase vs marine's 10%.

For bumps:

We're looking at 25 for HB, 8 for the condemnors, canceled by 1 point drops for HKs. So 29 guaranteed. There are 30 battle sisters, figure they went up 2 points each so 60. That's 89 points.

Which means the exorcists, immolators, repentia, arcos, and characters have to eat 211 points of increases between them, when Conflag Exos, repentia, and arcos were already only decent and immolators were terrible.

I'm looking at this compared to the marine leaks and not seeing how we'll be able to win games when their army suddenly goes down 100+ points compared to ours.

We'll make it work. Sisters are in a good position, even with a points increase.

Other armies are far worst than we are and they too get a points bump.

I'll wait for an official points list before getting to worked up over it.

My VH though are loving how 9th ed plays out.

ERJAK wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

Tabletop tactics have sisters vs gsc. 2k and sister army was around 1700 in 8th ed according to people who have seen it. Condempor boltgun 5pts.

Neever mind everything that was previously here.

Dude does have about a 1700 point list of stuff that wasn't very good kicked up to 2000pts. This is gonna be bad if the marine leaks are true. 20% increase vs marine's 10%[...]

I'm looking at this compared to the marine leaks and not seeing how we'll be able to win games when their army suddenly goes down 100+ points compared to ours.

I don't know, their basic Intercessors are getting an exactly equivalent increase - 17 to 20. Thunderfires, Centurions, the more common Dreadnoughts, are all seeing point increases between 15-60%. When I look at tournament-winning lists and run some rough numbers, it looks like an equivalent points increase.

Archebius wrote:

ERJAK wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

Tabletop tactics have sisters vs gsc. 2k and sister army was around 1700 in 8th ed according to people who have seen it. Condempor boltgun 5pts.

Neever mind everything that was previously here.

Dude does have about a 1700 point list of stuff that wasn't very good kicked up to 2000pts. This is gonna be bad if the marine leaks are true. 20% increase vs marine's 10%[...]

I'm looking at this compared to the marine leaks and not seeing how we'll be able to win games when their army suddenly goes down 100+ points compared to ours.

I don't know, their basic Intercessors are getting an exactly equivalent increase - 17 to 20. Thunderfires, Centurions, the more common Dreadnoughts, are all seeing point increases between 15-60%. When I look at tournament-winning lists and run some rough numbers, it looks like an equivalent points increase.

That's pretty bad in this specific scenario. Keep in mind that the list tabletop tactics had, used terrible SoB units like the Geminae and immolators.

If their tournament winning lists are getting the same bump as our garbage...that's a bit scary.

ERJAK wrote:

Archebius wrote:

ERJAK wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

Tabletop tactics have sisters vs gsc. 2k and sister army was around 1700 in 8th ed according to people who have seen it. Condempor boltgun 5pts.

Neever mind everything that was previously here.

Dude does have about a 1700 point list of stuff that wasn't very good kicked up to 2000pts. This is gonna be bad if the marine leaks are true. 20% increase vs marine's 10%[...]

I'm looking at this compared to the marine leaks and not seeing how we'll be able to win games when their army suddenly goes down 100+ points compared to ours.

I don't know, their basic Intercessors are getting an exactly equivalent increase - 17 to 20. Thunderfires, Centurions, the more common Dreadnoughts, are all seeing point increases between 15-60%. When I look at tournament-winning lists and run some rough numbers, it looks like an equivalent points increase.

That's pretty bad in this specific scenario. Keep in mind that the list tabletop tactics had, used terrible SoB units like the Geminae and immolators.

If their tournament winning lists are getting the same bump as our garbage...that's a bit scary.

Agreed

ERJAK wrote:

Archebius wrote:

I don't know, their basic Intercessors are getting an exactly equivalent increase - 17 to 20. Thunderfires, Centurions, the more common Dreadnoughts, are all seeing point increases between 15-60%. When I look at tournament-winning lists and run some rough numbers, it looks like an equivalent points increase.

That's pretty bad in this specific scenario. Keep in mind that the list tabletop tactics had, used terrible SoB units like the Geminae and immolators.

If their tournament winning lists are getting the same bump as our garbage...that's a bit scary.

Keep in mind that this is all based off incomplete, playtesting points lists and internet leaks. Thunderfire cannons are getting 60% increases. Whirlwinds are getting 50% increases. There are some things, like Chaplain Venerable Dreadnoughts and Leviathan Dreadnoughts, that I haven't seen the point values for. The increases to even their basic troops is in the 20% range. So yeah, when I run rough numbers, I see their 2000 point tournament lists from 2019 getting bumped up to ~2350, or an ~18% increase - but that's partially because the unknown point values of their big 'uns drags down the average.

Also, we haven't had any tournament seasons with the new Codex. Primaris Marines are getting targeted nerfs to their heavy hitters, and smaller point increases to those units that haven't seen much light. It's possible we're getting a more general point increases across the board, which would still leave us in a similar place at the end of the day.

its not really about what happens to our points. Its what happens to theirs. We are going to be generally cheaper regardless.and we dont have the broken stuff.list that other codex's do. Lol.

 Jancoran wrote:
its not really about what happens to our points. Its what happens to theirs. We are going to be generally cheaper regardless.and we dont have the broken stuff.list that other codex's do. Lol.

My issue is that we had plenty of units that needed to come down relative to a lot of other armies and that doesn't seem to be happening. Immolators are pretty bad, pengines and Morties are good on paper but were just a bit too expensive for their fragility in practice, retributors and dominions both suffered from their weapon choices being pretty significantly overcosted...or just stormbolters, the Triumph is like 40+ points too expensive as it is and gets screwed over by a lot of the new terrain rules, Celestine was too expensive, the Geminae are terrible. Our entire army when trying to make really competitive lists was Seraphim, Zephyrim, Exorcists, and Battle Sisters.

Meanwhile arguably the best army in the game is seeing point bumps on their best units in line with the bumps on our best units but, AT THE MOMENT(new information pending), seems to be getting significant discounts on THEIR bad units while we don't.

I imagine the bumps to sisters overall are similar to most armies but it's pretty annoying that Space Marines seem to be getting even more preferential treatment.

Sidebar: WTF is up with the bumps to heavy bolters and multimeltas? Lascannons were already better than multimeltas and no one was taking Heavy Bolters on units that didn't have to take them(outside of imperial fists), so how did Lascannons go down 5 points for both infantry and vehicles when multimeltas only went down 2 points for infantry, heavy bolters didn't change, and both went UP 5 points for vehicles? The twin multimelta is FIFTY points now. A Space Marine Eradicator has a better version of the same gun and is only 40pts TOTAL.

There's a rumor multimeltas are going to be heavy 2.

Taikishi wrote:
There's a rumor multimeltas are going to be heavy 2.

Unfortunately, that rumor came from a post by Marshal Valkenhayn in Bolter and Chainsword and is as follows:

"I wonder if Multi-Meltas might go up to 2 shots a piece. Hrm.
Anyway, I can't get the info from those pictures. Anyone seen the cost of LR Crusaders (with gear) and Crusader Squads?"

Just out of curious nature, how do the SOB players plan to use the Living Saint now, given the LOW rules?

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Just out of curious nature, how do the SOB players plan to use the Living Saint now, given the LOW rules?

Do you mean LoS?

It's largely irrelevant for her. Either you're using her for her bubble, at which point she's surrounded by tons of infantry, or you aren't and it's turn 3 and she's running off to murder things on her own. It's priests and combat canonesses that suffer more from that rule.

Personally i prefer junith for that reason i use junith as an aura bubble and shes cheaper (but that requires a second detatchment)

As to ninth its hard to say without the faq and points she had been stuck between buff and mellee and overpriced for either

The other factor to consider is if we have less models overall her aura may be less valuable. Especially if our fewer models need to spread out more as objectives seem to be more important

U02dah4 wrote:
Personally i prefer junith for that reason i use junith as an aura bubble and shes cheaper (but that requires a second detatchment)

As to ninth its hard to say without the faq and points she had been stuck between buff and mellee and overpriced for either

The other factor to consider is if we have less models overall her aura may be less valuable. Especially if our fewer models need to spread out more as objectives seem to be more important

The opposite is likely true if camping objectives is as critical as people online have been saying it is. Valorous Heart+ Celestine+Heroine makes us some of the most difficult relatively cheap models in the game to remove and the new detachment system makes taking a second detachment just for Junith highly impractical.

ERJAK wrote:

 Jancoran wrote:
its not really about what happens to our points. Its what happens to theirs. We are going to be generally cheaper regardless.and we dont have the broken stuff.list that other codex's do. Lol.

My issue is that we had plenty of units that needed to come down relative to a lot of other armies and that doesn't seem to be happening. Immolators are pretty bad, pengines and Morties are good on paper but were just a bit too expensive for their fragility in practice, retributors and dominions both suffered from their weapon choices being pretty significantly overcosted...or just stormbolters, the Triumph is like 40+ points too expensive as it is and gets screwed over by a lot of the new terrain rules, Celestine was too expensive, the Geminae are terrible. Our entire army when trying to make really competitive lists was Seraphim, Zephyrim, Exorcists, and Battle Sisters.

Meanwhile arguably the best army in the game is seeing point bumps on their best units in line with the bumps on our best units but, AT THE MOMENT(new information pending), seems to be getting significant discounts on THEIR bad units while we don't.

I imagine the bumps to sisters overall are similar to most armies but it's pretty annoying that Space Marines seem to be getting even more preferential treatment.

Sidebar: WTF is up with the bumps to heavy bolters and multimeltas? Lascannons were already better than multimeltas and no one was taking Heavy Bolters on units that didn't have to take them(outside of imperial fists), so how did Lascannons go down 5 points for both infantry and vehicles when multimeltas only went down 2 points for infantry, heavy bolters didn't change, and both went UP 5 points for vehicles? The twin multimelta is FIFTY points now. A Space Marine Eradicator has a better version of the same gun and is only 40pts TOTAL.

Thats a lot of gripes and what ifs bit its all relative. So I dont expect this to really be a big deal for us. The cheese is being moved but its still cheese. So we'll go find the new location and munch away.

I'm not worried at all. Everyone will have smaller armies. Its a cheaty way to "make games faster" as is going to five rounds. All cheats.

What upsets me is that they couldnt get gameplay down without those cheats. Reading the new rules, I saw nothing exrraordinarily different other than perhaps reserves? Some additional dice having to be rolled sucks for morale. I just dont see the faster game plY I hoped for nor less dice rolls. bummer.

So out of boredom and curiosity, I'm trying to reverse engineer the points costs of our units based on the TTT list posted.

I'm using a couple of assumptions for this:

1. Infantry will all raise by roughly the same amount. I'm assuming battle sisters, repentia, seraphim, and Arcos will all go up by either 2 or 3 points. This is probably the most flawed of the assumptions because the greater cost of the latter 3 could easily see them increased more than the former, but it makes the math easier so meh.

2. The leaked SM points were correct. This means 5pt condemnors, 5 point HKs and 15 point vehicle heavy bolters.

3. The standard army characters are going up roughly in line with SM point costs, i.e. between 10-15%

4. The points will be even 10s or 5s wherever possible(as seen by the macro plasma incinerator being 30 instead of 31 now).

5. Bad units will go up equal to or less than good units.


So with all that said here's my two sets of guesses.

Assuming Infantry goes up 3 points:

Canoness 55
Canoness 55
Celestine 175
Geminae 34
Repent 80
Repent 80
Rep Sup 40
Rep Sup 40
ArcoFlag 172
Exo 195
Exo 195
ConflagExo 165
Immolator 130
Immolator 130
Seraphim 79
Battle Sisters 125
Battle Sisters 125
Battle Sisters 125

Assuming infantry go up 2 points

Canoness 55
Canoness 55
Celestine 185
Geminae 32
Repent 75
Repent 75
Rep Sup 40
Rep Sup 40
ArcoFlag 150
Exo 215
Exo 215
ConflagExo 185
Immolator 130
Immolator 130
Seraphim 74
Battle Sisters 115
Battle Sisters 115
Battle Sisters 115

Now, obviously these aren't 100% correct because they're both over 2000, but it should be pretty much in the ballpark. Personally, I'm hoping immolators, the geminae, and the conflagration rocket go up more to eat some of the increase for Seraphim and the regular Exo, but beggars can't be choosers.

Great insight, ERJAK - that analysis is really appreciated. I wouldn't be surprised if the real numbers are similar.

I'm still wondering how in depth this FAQ will be, and I have very high hopes for this app. Part of my very much thinks data sheet updates for everyone is possible, but the other part of me expects the bare minimum of fixes to trickle in over time.

Flawed already as exorcists were reported to be same

tneva82 wrote:
Flawed already as exorcists were reported to be same

Firstly, duh. Of course it's flawed. I don't have the CA so it's all just guesswork done for fun. Dunno what you gain by 'well ACKTSCHULLY'ing here but whatever.

Secondly, where was it reported? because that's insane if true. Is it like the 'rumor' that meltas are going to 2 shots that was just idle speculation on B&C? For Exorcists to stay the same with Vehicle HBs going up 5 points they'd have to drop 5 points. They are also arguably the best unit in the codex.

But okay, let's assume that's true and see what we get:

NOTE: This kills my previous assumption that good units are going up less than bad units so I'll be ignoring that.

If true this means that the Non-Exorcist units now have to absorb approximately 300pts worth of increases. So we have to assume a 3 point bump for infantry minimum. With that and the same assumed bump for generic characters, Immolators, the geminae, and Celestine would have to eat 100 pts of increases between them. Keep in mind that's WITH repentia to 16, arcos to 16, seraphim to 14. and battle sisters to 12.

NOTE* Something I forgot to mention is that these are AS EQUIPPED in the TTT video so a canoness would be 55 with the 5 point 10% character nerf AND a 5 point Condemnor.

Here's what it looks like with no change exorcists and flat 3 infantry:

Canoness 55
Canoness 55
Celestine 190
Geminae 36
Repent 80
Repent 80
Rep Sup 40
Rep Sup 40
ArcoFlag 160
Exo 180
Exo 180
ConflagExo 150
Immolator 150
Immolator 150
Seraphim 79
Battle Sisters 125
Battle Sisters 125
Battle Sisters 125

Here's what it looks like with no change Exorcists and Repentia and Arcos (the most expensive infantry) going up 4

Canoness 55
Canoness 55
Celestine 180
Geminae 36
Repent 85
Repent 85
Rep Sup 40
Rep Sup 40
ArcoFlag 170
Exo 180
Exo 180
ConflagExo 150
Immolator 145
Immolator 145
Seraphim 79
Battle Sisters 125
Battle Sisters 125
Battle Sisters 125

Unless dominions can scout in vehicles again, I can't imagine we'll see another immolator for until the next CA if these are even close to the ballpark of correct.

Hello,

As a new sister player, i'd like to know if it was worth it to include ally psykers in our armies, or is it a waste ?

Also, with the advent of 2+ armor save infantry, what will be your strategy to bring them down ?

Thanks !

I meant how taking a Lord of War now costs 6 CP as a detachment. Not LoS.

Celestine is a regular HQ choice, so the LoW detachments are irrelevant for her. Also, souping in a single knight is 'only' 3 CP if I remember correctly.

Siegfriedfr wrote:
Hello,

As a new sister player, i'd like to know if it was worth it to include ally psykers in our armies, or is it a waste ?

Also, with the advent of 2+ armor save infantry, what will be your strategy to bring them down ?

Thanks !

Are you saying 2+ armor save or are you talking about the 1+ immune to AP thing the new stormshields get?

ERJAK wrote:

Siegfriedfr wrote:
Hello,

As a new sister player, i'd like to know if it was worth it to include ally psykers in our armies, or is it a waste ?

Also, with the advent of 2+ armor save infantry, what will be your strategy to bring them down ?

Thanks !

Are you saying 2+ armor save or are you talking about the 1+ immune to AP thing the new stormshields get?

Isn't is the same result ? They can only be wounded if they roll 1.

Siegfriedfr wrote:

ERJAK wrote:

Siegfriedfr wrote:
Hello,

As a new sister player, i'd like to know if it was worth it to include ally psykers in our armies, or is it a waste ?

Also, with the advent of 2+ armor save infantry, what will be your strategy to bring them down ?

Thanks !

Are you saying 2+ armor save or are you talking about the 1+ immune to AP thing the new stormshields get?

Isn't is the same result ? They can only be wounded if they roll 1.

No-because AP affects 2+ armor models, but it does not affect 1+ armor models.

If you fire a Blessed Bolts Storm Bolter at a Terminator using the current rules for Storm Shields, thy get a 3+ roll if they use their invuln, or, if for some reason they want it to die, they get a 4+ on their armor.
If all Storm Shields are changed to be 4+ Invuln and +1 to Save Characteristic, then they would get a 2+ roll on their armor, even against the AP-2.