In common English usage, is something 'just' happened, it means it happened immediately prior to now.
Not necessarily. A phrase in common use where I'm from is just last (week, month, year, x time interval), e.g. I bought a new car just last year, or I just went shopping last week. It is also used as an adverb to describe something exact or precise, e.g. just right or very recently; the phone just rang, or model just destroyed.
It's clearly referring to something you do in immediate reaction to a unit being destroyed. Not next phase, not next turn, immediately.
That said, I agree with you here. From the context it seems clear that it means use this stratagem when the last wound from the last model in the unit is removed.
I have the same problem with this stratagem that I have with Reanimation Protocols. The intention is clear but the wording is not, and without elaboration is open to interpretation.
Valkyrie wrote: Jesus Christ, we really getting into BCB-levels of rules-lawyering on an edition which hasn't even been released yet?
Yes. If GW can't be bothered to write things unambiguously, then we should take them to task. The tourney-bros are going to pick the rules apart and exploit bad wording, and as a result the game will be rebalanced and FAQ'd into oblivion as a result of tournament results. FAQ's are all fine and dandy, but in this edition they are harping on the consolidation aspect of the new edition. It can be difficult to keep all of the FAQ's if you aren't a Warhammer+ member. I would much rather that all of you voice your concerns and have them heard and communicated to GW then keep seeing people shoot down concerns as stupid or cope.
In common English usage, is something 'just' happened, it means it happened immediately prior to now.
Not necessarily. A phrase in common use where I'm from is just last (week, month, year, x time interval), e.g. I bought a new car just last year, or I just went shopping last week. It is also used as an adverb to describe something exact or precise, e.g. just right or very recently; the phone just rang, or model just destroyed.
It's clearly referring to something you do in immediate reaction to a unit being destroyed. Not next phase, not next turn, immediately.
That said, I agree with you here. From the context it seems clear that it means use this stratagem when the last wound from the last model in the unit is removed.
I have the same problem with this stratagem that I have with Reanimation Protocols. The intention is clear but the wording is not, and without elaboration is open to interpretation.
I think we can all agree that the wording could be made clearer to better match intent - it might be down to the limitations of the 'Stratagem card' or whatever, but i think it could be improved upon a lot. However, as you say, the intent seems clear enough. For the time being, it probably comes down to talking with your opponent beforehand, TOs making a ruling, and eventually a FAQ if the issue persists.
I think we can all agree that the wording could be made clearer to better match intent - it might be down to the limitations of the 'Stratagem card' or whatever, but i think it could be improved upon a lot. However, as you say, the intent seems clear enough. For the time being, it probably comes down to talking with your opponent beforehand, TOs making a ruling, and eventually a FAQ if the issue persists.
Exactly. Now is the time to speak out about these kinds of issues so they can be addressed. Since all the indices at launch are digital, they are still changeable before release and don't necessarily need a dozen FAQ's in the future.
Valkyrie wrote: Jesus Christ, we really getting into BCB-levels of rules-lawyering on an edition which hasn't even been released yet?
Oh man I haven't heard that name in a long time....
crazysaneman wrote: Yes. If GW can't be bothered to write things unambiguously, then we should take them to task. The tourney-bros are going to pick the rules apart and exploit bad wording, and as a result the game will be rebalanced and FAQ'd into oblivion as a result of tournament results. FAQ's are all fine and dandy, but in this edition they are harping on the consolidation aspect of the new edition. It can be difficult to keep all of the FAQ's if you aren't a Warhammer+ member. I would much rather that all of you voice your concerns and have them heard and communicated to GW then keep seeing people shoot down concerns as stupid or cope.
In my opinion there's no alternate scenario that isn't totally absurd. To me it's a non-issue and does not need an FAQ and I can't see any other tournament players I know thinking differently.
I missed this yesterday in the Guard preview, some might have seen it some might have not:
you have the Born Soldiers Detachment rule, which confers Lethal Hits on ranged attacks made by units that Remained Stationary.
So the detachment ability for Guard is 6s to hit auto wound but nerfed slightly to require you to either stand still or find a rule that lets you count as standing still.
There is also mention of an enhancment (warlord trait) that makes it 5s to hit critical hit (auto wound) (again requiring Remained Stationary).
So we almost have the Devastating Cruddaces USR, which requires the following combination:
- Lethal Hits (Critical Hits (6s) auto wound)
- Improved Critical Hits chance to 5s or 4s.
- missing rule - Critical Hits count as Critical Wounds.
- Devastating Wounds (Critical Wounds (6s) are mortal wounds).
I'm also reading this from the Daemons preview:
An objective is only captured when the total Objective Control of nearby models exceeds that of their opponent, so a unit with OC 0 will effectively ‘tie’ even when faced with a complete lack of challengers.
As saying OC 0 units can't control an objective (capture not being a word really used in the rules) so unless you have a rule to make the objective sticky, an OC0 unit won't score Primary, turn off banners, etc.
I'm expecting the Sisters preview tomorrow to show the downsides of the PSYCHIC keyword. I also don't think we've seen any litanies/prayers previewed yet so we should find out if it is still roll a 2+/3+ in your command phase to do stuff.
Looking at the Space Marine Terminator Captain combined with Roboute, it looks like you could use the same strategem three times in a single phase (probably on 3 units not 3 times on the same unit) for X CP - 0 CP - 0 CP. Three uses of Only in Death Does Duty End for 2 CP rather than 6 CP sounds pretty good.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Ah yes, seen a few people a bit confused why the daemonic pact rule says:
If your WARLORD is LUCIUS THE ETERNAL, you can only include SLAANESH LEGIONES DAEMONICA units using these rules
I suspect Lucius will have a rule on his datasheet that makes Noise Marines Battleline if he is the warlord.
So if you don't have him as a warlord, you can have a generic Slaanesh themed CSM list with up to 3 units of Noise Marines and can take any daemons you want. But, if you want Noise Marines as Battleline so you can take 6 units that will mean you can only take Slaanesh daemons.
This whole Lucius thing is of course to tide us over to Codex EC.
I am irrationally angry that they moved the invulns to a (in my opinion) far more sensible location for the combat patrol entries. Why move it all for that matter?
If a unit has multiple statlines (artillery with crew, drones imbedded in squads?, other similar things) they might want to keep everyone on a single line, so they could stake multiples.
Now they don’t do that sort of thing very often, and invulns are rare, but maybe that’s why?
One thing I notice is that in both 9th and 10th editions, when souping together daemons and CSM, it's always the CSM that have to be the dominant faction, and now the daemon detachment won't even be able to have the warlord. I really wish that GW allowed for CSM to be the allied detachment, with the daemons getting the warlord and now keeping Shadows, as there are cases of bands of CSM worshipping greater daemons and it would be fun to play an army like that.
Voss wrote: Its largely consistent. If you aren't fighting in the Eye or similar region (where almost no one non-chaos goes), daemons are temporary.
When daemons attack, someone brings them there via summoning. Chaos marines are best equipped to do that, one way or another.
With the opening of the Rift, daemons are becoming more solid in the material world. Also, if they can command mixed daemon/mortal armies in AoS, I don't see why it can't happen in 40k. I'd really love to run my custom warband, the Brethren of the Rainfather, with Rotigus being the warlord.
VladimirHerzog wrote: "its been twenty years, warhammer 50k just released, Breton is still confused about critical wounds even if GW has adressed the issue multiple times already"
I've said I want to know more, I've said nobody here could answer it so I'm waiting for the rulebook, and how many years from now will you still be lying about what other people said?
Karol wrote: If an armies core anti tank was 3 MM on dreadnoughts though, then those armies don't have a replacement unit armed with melta, which they could spam.
your dreads can take twinlascannons instead
the new dread doesn't have TLLC though....
Plus that whole new Dread being shipped for loyalists with a TLLC, and a Super Krak launcher.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: Pretty sure Frag Grenade went up a point of Strength too. Always used to be S3 for Grenade, S4 for Missile?
ArcaneHorror wrote: One thing I notice is that in both 9th and 10th editions, when souping together daemons and CSM, it's always the CSM that have to be the dominant faction, and now the daemon detachment won't even be able to have the warlord. I really wish that GW allowed for CSM to be the allied detachment, with the daemons getting the warlord and now keeping Shadows, as there are cases of bands of CSM worshipping greater daemons and it would be fun to play an army like that.
Not true. Disciples of Belakor. You can play them with just one CSM unit. Daemons even kept warpstorm abilities.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
EightFoldPath wrote: I missed this yesterday in the Guard preview, some might have seen it some might have not:
you have the Born Soldiers Detachment rule, which confers Lethal Hits on ranged attacks made by units that Remained Stationary.
So the detachment ability for Guard is 6s to hit auto wound but nerfed slightly to require you to either stand still or find a rule that lets you count as standing still.
There is also mention of an enhancment (warlord trait) that makes it 5s to hit critical hit (auto wound) (again requiring Remained Stationary).
So we almost have the Devastating Cruddaces USR, which requires the following combination:
- Lethal Hits (Critical Hits (6s) auto wound)
- Improved Critical Hits chance to 5s or 4s.
- missing rule - Critical Hits count as Critical Wounds.
- Devastating Wounds (Critical Wounds (6s) are mortal wounds).
I'm looking forward for guard arty spam which will hit on 3s, autowounding on 5s, and maybe even doing MWs on 6s to wound.
H.B.M.C. wrote: Not gonna lie, I'm not even sure what the argument is about at this stage.
There isn't one. I mentioned wanting to know more about what Critical Wounds can do, someone misunderstood that as some sort of confusion over how to create one. Anything beyond that is either someone trolling, or someone who didn't go far enough back to look.
novembermike wrote: Breton, I think everyone reads your stuff the same way. If you don't like how they're reading it then it's on you to change how you write it.
I don't, I think a number of people do - and inject personal animus into their reading. Unless you can find someplace I said I don't understand how Critical Wounds are made, or that it's unacceptable they don't do more on their own.
You're missing the point, you're questioning what a critical wound is, which inevitably prompts people to give you the definition we've been provided by GW. The conflict happens because the way you're directing your comments is causing it to look like a query, when either it's an inner monologue/rhetorical and you're not expecting a response, or alternatively like you have a lack of understanding of what GW has said.
No, I'm not. "I want to know what Critical Wounds are" is not a query. "I know how to make them, I want to know more about what they do" is not a query.
In reality after it having gone on for half a dozen pages and people getting frustrated at you being offended by their attempts to explain or offer their insight, patience wears thin. But unless you phrase your position better you're going to keep getting what you have so far - people grumpily reiterating to you it's a mechanic to automatically wound on a roll of X.
Nobody can give you a rulebook definition with citation,
And yet again, I'd like to point out I didn't ask for one. You've gone on for half a dozen pages where I tell you I didn't ask for it, so you can tell me you don't have one to give me.
nobody can tell you every rule they will combo with it or each unit entry it'll appear on. We can, however, give likely instances where weapons have a "wounds on X" mechanic, propose it'll replace those and potentially combo with other USR/abilities that key off critical wounds. We can also propose that it's usefulness is evident and knowing GW and their iterations of 40k it likely doesn't do anything on it's own beyond that normal wound on a value of X.
H.B.M.C. wrote: Not gonna lie, I'm not even sure what the argument is about at this stage.
They're arguing about how one person posts "what if" rules scenarios vs how others do it.
Not even that -
I said I wanted to know more about what Critical Wounds do - i.e. what you can do with them.
Someone told me how to make Critical Wounds.
I explained I already know how to make them, I was wondering what you could do with them.
Someone told me they don't do anything.
I pointed out making Critical Wounds just to trigger Devastating Wounds a little more feels like a little too much work and they probably do do something else we haven't found out about yet.
Someone else told me again how to make them, while someone else said they I shouldn't ask what they do (when I didn't ask, I just said I wanted to know because I knew it wasn't out yet and was speaking to the future).
If a unit has a Vox Caster, do you get the effect of it if you target the (destroyed) unit with Reinforcements stratagem?
This should go in the rules forum once it goes live - but I'd guess its a matter of timing - you can't use the stratagem until the Vox Caster has left the table (and assuming "on the table" is still a thing) the Vox Caster wouldn't be around to trigger the Vox Caster rule.
If you want some other questions to ponder:
Look on the options Page: This Unit can have up to two Leder Units... yadda yadda. Then goes on to say no more than one of those units can be a Command Squad unit which implies the Command Squad will be a Leader Unit (potentially) added to yet another squad and while the Strat prevents bringing back chracters the Command Squad unit may not be a Character - but on the flip side, is an attached command squad still a seperate unit, or once it attaches (assumedly pre-game) does it then become one giant unit?
- Highly doubtful that turret weapons will remain, considering all special rules are now apart of the datasheet. If it’s not there, then it’s not there.
Not quite - all special rules are not a part of the datasheet. They're bringing back USR's meaning many special rules are going to be in the BRB. That said Turret is still probably gone because we didn't see a keyword or teaser here or on the Repulsor
Automatically Appended Next Post:
CthuluIsSpy wrote: Yeah, to me it's clear that you play it as soon as a single unit gets wiped out, hence why you can activate it in any phase.
So lose a unit to melee in your combat phase? You can use it. Lose a unit in your opponent's combat phase? Play it. Opponent just shot your conscripts off the field? Ditto.
Its basically a reaction / trap card.
It was just Destroyed when the last model gets picked up.
novembermike wrote: Breton, I think everyone reads your stuff the same way. If you don't like how they're reading it then it's on you to change how you write it.
I don't, I think a number of people do - and inject personal animus into their reading. Unless you can find someplace I said I don't understand how Critical Wounds are made, or that it's unacceptable they don't do more on their own.
You're missing the point, you're questioning what a critical wound is, which inevitably prompts people to give you the definition we've been provided by GW. The conflict happens because the way you're directing your comments is causing it to look like a query, when either it's an inner monologue/rhetorical and you're not expecting a response, or alternatively like you have a lack of understanding of what GW has said.
No, I'm not. "I want to know what Critical Wounds are" is not a query. "I know how to make them, I want to know more about what they do" is not a query.
You're requesting more information on a goddamn board, of course it's a query, in fact you say it is in this very post:
I said I wanted to know more about what Critical Wounds do - i.e. what you can do with them.
If you don't want a response or conversation don't use an ambiguously worded query as a statement on a public forum.
As you're concerned nobody has been reading it or goes far enough back:
Original point is you stating you'd like more information:
That still doesn't explain what a Critical Wound is. I mean a Wound, a Critical Wound, a Mortal Wound? A Wound can armor save, a Mortal Wound can't, what happens to a Critical Wound?
And where it goes off the rails with you acting like a diva because people don't understand what your confusion is about which spiralled to here.
Yeah, your snark aside - That's pretty much the part they've leaked. Few people are truly as stupid as you're trying to imply here. And again that doesn't explain what a Critical Wound is. I'm pretty sure I didn't ask how to create one, but that I wanted to look and see what happened because of one
One of the first things I'm looking for is what a Critical Wound is vs a Mortal Wound.
Why yes, yes I did. So perhaps myself and the people pointing out Critical Wounds are potentially somewhat special and it would be nice to look up what they mean aren't as stupid as the people who keep trying to explain the part we've already seen and we are NOT asking/wondering about. Is there any part left that's confusing to you?
I'll not respond again on the topic and leave you to your external monologue.
Sledgehammer wrote: I've got a feeling this edition is going to be great for melee armies and units capable of shooting and fighting.
We have not seen anything about flyers, or the inclusion of forge world units as a whole.
I think my vendettas are probably going to have 3 standard twin link lascannons with none of the anti armor benefits it had in 6th and 7th edition.
What makes you say that? That's an honest question - I really haven't gotten a feeling about that in either direction.
I'm hoping the CSM Legionaries had a typo with their Boltgun not being Rapidfire (or anything - not heavy, not assault etc) - The feeling I do get is that 200 points of Player 1 Generic Troopish Unit vs 200 points of Player 2 Generic Troopish Unit (Think the Necron Warriors, Gants/Guants, Intercessors, Legionaries, and on and on) - I think those are going to be an all day pack a lunch thing without some sort of intervention.
I want to say it feels like its going to be Rock Paper Scissors because I don't mean it exactly like that - I don't think Monsters beat troops beat vehicles beat monsters or like that - but I mean it feels like if you skew you won't have an important aspect provided by the other type i.e. if you load up on 200 hormagaunts, you'll run into trouble displacing the 40 Space Marines - while a Primarch, Greater Daemon probably a Brutalis Dread, etc - the big monsters and probably vehicles then have the damage output to displace but not the soaking and OC abilities of the infantry. Its too early to say yet, but it feels like they've set up the rules to push you away from skew.
No, I'm not. "I want to know what Critical Wounds are" is not a query. "I know how to make them, I want to know more about what they do" is not a query.
You're requesting more information on a goddamn board, of course it's a query, in fact you say it is in this very post:
I said I wanted to know more about what Critical Wounds do - i.e. what you can do with them.
If you don't want a response or conversation don't use an ambiguously worded query as a statement on a public forum.
As you're concerned nobody has been reading it or goes far enough back:
Original point is you stating you'd like more information:
Anti-[KW] X+ - Automatically does Critical Wound to [Key Word] on Wound roll of X+.
One of the first things I'm looking for is what a Critical Wound is vs a Mortal Wound.
Yeah that's still not a request. "One of the first things I'm doing is to buy some of those sweet new Arks of Omen: Sanguinary Guard Dice Sets" is not a request for someone on a board to sell me some dice. "One of the first things I'm going to do is paint up a new Land Raider because my old one is chipped up a bit from travel" is not a request for someone to paint me up a land raider.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
EightFoldPath wrote: I also don't think we've seen any litanies/prayers previewed yet so we should find out if it is still roll a 2+/3+ in your command phase to do stuff.
I was assuming there wouldn't be any Litanies/Prayers. I always felt like they (Litanies at least) were added as an offset for psychic powers to make taking a Chaplain over a Libby a more difficult/even/offset choice. Now that psychic phases are gone (and thus most psychic powers) I wouldn't expect Litanies to stick either. I assume they will have a bespoke "when joined to a unit...." rule that will look like at least one of their Litanies - and it will probably just be "on" no check.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Nevelon wrote: If a unit has multiple statlines (artillery with crew, drones imbedded in squads?, other similar things) they might want to keep everyone on a single line, so they could stake multiples.
Now they don’t do that sort of thing very often, and invulns are rare, but maybe that’s why?
I do prefer all the saves being in one spot.
They do it often enough you're right, they probably need/want a system for it. Thunderfire Cannons, The Silent King - drones as you mentioned - and its likely to get even more common with characters inside squads again that's likely to be the most common cause of a mixed stat-sheet thing.
Not being able to score at all, even uncontested, with 0 OC means battle shock is going to be critical, and also means if immunity to it stays, those units will be head and shoulders above the rest.
Wayniac wrote: Not being able to score at all, even uncontested, with 0 OC means battle shock is going to be critical, and also means if immunity to it stays, those units will be head and shoulders above the rest.
Rip plague marines I guess.
In my opinion, if synapse isn't making stuff immune to battle shock, nothing is.
That said, I don't understand your comment about plague marines, can you please explain?
There is also mention of an enhancment (warlord trait) that makes it 5s to hit critical hit (auto wound) (again requiring Remained Stationary).
So we almost have the Devastating Cruddaces USR, which requires the following combination:
- Lethal Hits (Critical Hits (6s) auto wound)
- Improved Critical Hits chance to 5s or 4s.
- missing rule - Critical Hits count as Critical Wounds.
- Devastating Wounds (Critical Wounds (6s) are mortal wounds).
Lethal Hits are less useful the higher the strength of the weapon, but little solace when lasguns are getting dumped into you. If that enhancement is an aura it could wind up being super dumb.
So it's strongly implied by indirect USR that you can only kill models in line of sight, not wipe units because one guy wasn't quite round the corner. Add in the new regen abilities, cover saves a plenty etc and it's feasible moat of your army could be alive t4
Dudeface wrote: So it's strongly implied by indirect USR that you can only kill models in line of sight, not wipe units because one guy wasn't quite round the corner. Add in the new regen abilities, cover saves a plenty etc and it's feasible moat of your army could be alive t4
Not if your army is t3 and doesn't benefit from cover because of their 3+ save.
Dudeface wrote: So it's strongly implied by indirect USR that you can only kill models in line of sight, not wipe units because one guy wasn't quite round the corner. Add in the new regen abilities, cover saves a plenty etc and it's feasible moat of your army could be alive t4
Not if your army is t3 and doesn't benefit from cover because of their 3+ save.
Bro.... don't bring that gak back.
If you can't kill models you don't see, thats a MUUUUUCH bigger defensive buff than "muh 2+ save".
Dudeface wrote: So it's strongly implied by indirect USR that you can only kill models in line of sight, not wipe units because one guy wasn't quite round the corner. Add in the new regen abilities, cover saves a plenty etc and it's feasible moat of your army could be alive t4
Not if your army is t3 and doesn't benefit from cover because of their 3+ save.
I suppose you know their points costs, character interactions, full sets of strats and all other relevant info then? Kinda screaming into the void about nothing otherwise. I'd love to hear your case for them being a 4+ just so ap- can give them the exact same save.
They removed the cap on how many AoF's a unit can use in a phase, which made them change the rules on the simiulacrum- You used to need a Simulacrum to do more than one AoF- know it grants you Miracle dice for destroying units.
I'm pretty stoked- it isn't a big change, and any of the little tweaks seemed to work in our favour.
PenitentJake wrote: They removed the cap on how many AoF's a unit can use in a phase, which made them change the rules on the simiulacrum- You used to need a Simulacrum to do more than one AoF- know it grants you Miracle dice for destroying units.
I'm pretty stoked- it isn't a big change, and any of the little tweaks seemed to work in our favour.
Might want to give the Triuphm a second look, especially the Simulacrum of the Ebon Chalice
Wayniac wrote: Not being able to score at all, even uncontested, with 0 OC means battle shock is going to be critical, and also means if immunity to it stays, those units will be head and shoulders above the rest.
Rip plague marines I guess.
In my opinion, if synapse isn't making stuff immune to battle shock, nothing is.
That said, I don't understand your comment about plague marines, can you please explain?
I was thinking of poxwalkers are immune they will outclass plague marines yet again as the "go to" troop choice because they can't be shut down. Just like when PMs were too expensive and it was zombie hordes for days.
PenitentJake wrote: They removed the cap on how many AoF's a unit can use in a phase, which made them change the rules on the simiulacrum- You used to need a Simulacrum to do more than one AoF- know it grants you Miracle dice for destroying units.
I'm pretty stoked- it isn't a big change, and any of the little tweaks seemed to work in our favour.
Might want to give the Triuphm a second look, especially the Simulacrum of the Ebon Chalice
Yep, you're right.
Now things suck because the BSS simulacra doesn't let units perform a second act, which sucks. If simulacra GENERATE MD, but don't let you use more than one, we definitely are going to end up with more MD than we can use.
Just to play devil's advocate, what happens RAW if i substitute a miracle dice of '6' for a damage roll in an damage D3 weapon? I know what is intended, but the way they've written it does seem to offer the possibility that you can actually 'roll' a result of 6 that way...
PenitentJake wrote: They removed the cap on how many AoF's a unit can use in a phase, which made them change the rules on the simiulacrum- You used to need a Simulacrum to do more than one AoF- know it grants you Miracle dice for destroying units.
I'm pretty stoked- it isn't a big change, and any of the little tweaks seemed to work in our favour.
Might want to give the Triuphm a second look, especially the Simulacrum of the Ebon Chalice
Yep, you're right.
Now things suck because the BSS simulacra doesn't let units perform a second act, which sucks. If simulacra GENERATE MD, but don't let you use more than one, we definitely are going to end up with more MD than we can use.
Bah...
I was happy with my first read. Less happy now.
I honestly prefer the Simulacrum giving MD if the unit destroys something instead of allowing a unit to perform more. I know we will end up having way more MD than we can probably use, but I expect this detachment (and hopefully ALL of our detachments once the codex is out) to have some stratagem similar to "Moment of Grace" where you can burn Miracle Dice to either manipulate a roll, bring a character back with X wounds left, or some other kind of interaction. My hope is that they de-restrict a sort of "Divine Intervention" stratagem and allow Vahl to get up again and Celestine to get up for a 3rd time somehow lol.
There is still so much we don't know but at least the Exorcist FINALLY gets built-in indirect fire and the anti-tank missiles feel stronger at least (they will deal with T9 effectively now and will have a reasonable chance of harming T10). AP -2 feels much less bad now with AP in the game going down and the fact that its Heavy means the Exorcist COULD be hitting on 2s with direct fire or still on 3s with indirect despite the BS penalty. D6+2 shots beats D6 and keeps the same minimum as 3d3 while only losing a slight maximum/average. I would have liked it to retain Blast but it feels like a relatively reliable weapon while still being less reliable than before to some degree, which fits its lore and I am fine with that. I wish it would have stayed at 48" range though, but 36" was bound to happen with range going down so much across the board. I expect the Castigaor Battle Cannon to go down to 48" instead of 72" like the Guard one, I just really hope that keeps AP -3 (or at least only goes down to AP -2) and gets like d6+2 shots as well, or even d6+3 and like S12-14 just so we have some kind of dedicated anti-tank firepower now that we have to be beyond half dead for meltas to be effective lol. Also MAYBE they will let us choose which missiles we want to fire on the Exorcist datasheet instead of forcing us to choose one to have all game...(probably not but I will hope until the datasheet drops at launch).
Vahl's melee being roughly the same except for losing AP on her strike feels a bit meh though. I think she either could have gotten more attacks or S9 at least along with keeping AP -3 and it still would not have been nearly as wild as Gulliman or Abbadon. Still, an MD of 6 for her wound roll will give her guaranteed 3 mortals which is nice and any other 6s to wound will also do it so she has the potential to spike relatively high in damage. Hopefully she still has good buffs to the army and has a way to buff her own melee with AP, Attacks, or even Strength, which would make a lot of sense given how underwhelming it looks right now. Maybe that will be something she can choose or an aura of "Strength +1/Attacks +1/AP -1 extra in melee for everyone within 6"" or some combination of that. Just gonna have to wait and see.
Tsagualsa wrote: Just to play devil's advocate, what happens RAW if i substitute a miracle dice of '6' for a damage roll in an damage D3 weapon? I know what is intended, but the way they've written it does seem to offer the possibility that you can actually 'roll' a result of 6 that way...
I would be the first to point it out if it was wrong, but it checks out: you substitute the dice value "as if it had been rolled" (actual quote from the rule) so a 6 just gets halved like normal to get the D3 final result.
I'm mildly curious with this reveal the interaction of Indirect Fire and Ignores Cover, as seen on the Exorcist.
I see two options:
1) The Indirect Fire overrides the Ignores Cover - you get to ignore the cover saves of units you can see, but not on units you cannot see.
2) The Ignores cover overrides the Indirect Fire - you ignore cover saves no matter what, including from the Indirect Fire rule you have.
I'm personally guessing it is 2, but just a bit of curiosity there.
So...now that LD tests are reversed what will SoB players use 1's & 2's Miracle Dice for?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
kurhanik wrote: I'm mildly curious with this reveal the interaction of Indirect Fire and Ignores Cover, as seen on the Exorcist.
I see two options:
1) The Indirect Fire overrides the Ignores Cover - you get to ignore the cover saves of units you can see, but not on units you cannot see.
2) The Ignores cover overrides the Indirect Fire - you ignore cover saves no matter what, including from the Indirect Fire rule you have.
I'm personally guessing it is 2, but just a bit of curiosity there.
I have to imagine 2 as well, only because the Exorcist has the Ignores Cover keyword too.
I bet there will be Indirect Fire weapons that don't have the Ignores Cover keyword and their targets will get to claim cover.
They’ve found the excuse to make Sisters ballistic skill 4 plus on heavy weapons whilst other armies haven’t had their profile nerfed. That is a slippery slope when all the others armies are getting profiles boosted.
The Sisters bolter has stayed the same whilst marine bolters are 2 shots all the time, you can advance and fire, as well as getting the heavy key word. So hopefully Intercessors are 25 points now.
They haven’t done anything to address survivability and the Sisters main things is Acts of Faith which works best on single models like a multi melta a big CC unit making a charge or a characters invulnerable save.
Rather than incentivise players to stop taking small throw away 5 sisters units to camp on objectives they made a rule specifically to encourage you to do precisely that.
So unless they’re 7 to 8 points a model I don’t see them being viable as line infantry. All the special rules will just end up boosting your elite infantry and they’ve continued the glass hammer mentality which makes the army play like Eldar.
As expected tanks got better. Acts of Faith pretty much the same.
Wayniac 809431 11531778 wrote:
I was thinking of poxwalkers are immune they will outclass plague marines yet again as the "go to" troop choice because they can't be shut down. Just like when PMs were too expensive and it was zombie hordes for days.
Hopefully not though.
I am not good at the joke things. And more or less every attempt from me to make one ended with me getting a warrning, but one per 1-3 month ain't that bad. So here I go.
Plague Marines have to pay for the 6 week, when one of the head designers was being slapped around by Mortarion in 9th ed. :fist shake:
I really can't wait to see 1ksons and GK rules, it is going to be actual fun to read about them from GW.
So unless they’re 7 to 8 points a model I don’t see them being viable as line infantry.
I have absolutely no proof, but I'm sure that 40K is about to receive the AoS 3.0 treatment : a massive point increase for everyone, making the armies a lot smaller and thus, "solving" the problem of the prices because you will need less models to play 1K or 2K games.
When you come from 40K, you often feel that you are playing a 1K5 points game despite it being a 2K points.
They’ve found the excuse to make Sisters ballistic skill 4 plus on heavy weapons whilst other armies haven’t had their profile nerfed. That is a slippery slope when all the others armies are getting profiles boosted.
we havnt seen infantry-mounted Multi-melta or heavy bolter on something else than sisters, right?
The Sisters bolter has stayed the same whilst marine bolters are 2 shots all the time, you can advance and fire, as well as getting the heavy key word. So hopefully Intercessors are 25 points now.
They haven’t done anything to address survivability and the Sisters main things is Acts of Faith which works best on single models like a multi melta a big CC unit making a charge or a characters invulnerable save.
Rather than incentivise players to stop taking small throw away 5 sisters units to camp on objectives they made a rule specifically to encourage you to do precisely that.
so maybe thats how GW wants the army to be played? i don't complain that i can't bring a shooting list when i play khorne
So unless they’re 7 to 8 points a model I don’t see them being viable as line infantry. All the special rules will just end up boosting your elite infantry and they’ve continued the glass hammer mentality which makes the army play like Eldar.
What metric are you comparing them to? we havnt seen any points so far.
So unless they’re 7 to 8 points a model I don’t see them being viable as line infantry.
I have absolutely no proof, but I'm sure that 40K is about to receive the AoS 3.0 treatment : a massive point increase for everyone, making the armies a lot smaller and thus, "solving" the problem of the prices because you will need less models to play 1K or 2K games.
When you come from 40K, you often feel that you are playing a 1K5 points game despite it being a 2K points.
i would love for them to do that honestly, after playing AoS for a few months now, the smaller scale of armies is much more interesting
Because Sisters shouldn’t have 5 model units being objective counters. Sisters of battle should, like in the art, have blocks of infantry that move onto an objective and mean the enemy has to invest in shifting them off. It should be both viable to do that and you shouldn’t incentivise players to break the game by getting two or even four units of 5 on one objective to harvest double miracle dice.
So marines get bolter discipline baked in but sacred rites and anti psychic saves go? Plus keeping their -1 AP, getting advance and fire and the heavy key word to hit on 2 plus if they stay still. Intercessors should be 3 times more expensive than a Sister of Battle if you’re going to keep heaping bonuses on them.
It’s not 3rd edition. A 3 plus save doesn’t matter even without AP. Why do you think they gave marines 2 wounds?
They’ve found the excuse to make Sisters ballistic skill 4 plus on heavy weapons whilst other armies haven’t had their profile nerfed. That is a slippery slope when all the others armies are getting profiles boosted.
The Sisters bolter has stayed the same whilst marine bolters are 2 shots all the time, you can advance and fire, as well as getting the heavy key word. So hopefully Intercessors are 25 points now.
They haven’t done anything to address survivability and the Sisters main things is Acts of Faith which works best on single models like a multi melta a big CC unit making a charge or a characters invulnerable save.
Rather than incentivise players to stop taking small throw away 5 sisters units to camp on objectives they made a rule specifically to encourage you to do precisely that.
So unless they’re 7 to 8 points a model I don’t see them being viable as line infantry. All the special rules will just end up boosting your elite infantry and they’ve continued the glass hammer mentality which makes the army play like Eldar.
As expected tanks got better. Acts of Faith pretty much the same.
I didn't even see the BS thing. There's really no point in bringing guns with sisters.
Totalwar1402 wrote: Because Sisters shouldn’t have 5 model units being objective counters. Sisters of battle should, like in the art, have blocks of infantry that move onto an objective and mean the enemy has to invest in shifting them off. It should be both viable to do that and you shouldn’t incentivise players to break the game by getting two or even four units of 5 on one objective to harvest double miracle dice.
So marines get bolter discipline baked in but sacred rites and anti psychic saves go? Plus keeping their -1 AP, getting advance and fire and the heavy key word to hit on 2 plus if they stay still. Intercessors should be 3 times more expensive than a Sister of Battle if you’re going to keep heaping bonuses on them.
It’s not 3rd edition. A 3 plus save doesn’t matter even without AP. Why do you think they gave marines 2 wounds?
Did you read Defenders Of The Faith?
You get one die per objective held by a Battle Sisters unit. Not one per Battle Sisters unit on an objective.
And for all we know, an Intercessor IS three times as expensive as a Sister. They could be four times as expensive, or twice, or a hundred times. We don't know yet.
Totalwar1402 wrote: They’ve found the excuse to make Sisters ballistic skill 4 plus on heavy weapons whilst other armies haven’t had their profile nerfed. That is a slippery slope when all the others armies are getting profiles boosted.
As I explained to you pages ago, with the reversal to how HEAVY works compared to now - and ignoring that it should go back to move or fire for INFANTRY, but I digress - if the intent is for SoBINFANTRY-mounted heavy weapons is for them to hit on a base 3+ if they don't move, then their BS needed to change to 4+ to start with.
And it isn't just SoB - we can see it happening for the Chaincannon on CSM Legionaries, though I'm not sure why the Havoc Autocannon is 3+. We haven't seen IGINFANTRYHW yet, so we don't know where they stand, nor SMHW peeps, either.
+ + +
I see the Crusade article is up, and it does demonstrate another use for Critical Wounds, with the Precise Weapon Modification (CW gain the PRECISION ability). I can't recall off-hand what we've seen about PRECISION to date, if anything, but I find it a little that it kicks in on the Wound step - it feels like something that makes more sense on a hit. On the other hand, given it is a CW, the hit would've wounded anyway, so maybe it isn't as odd as I'm thinking - and that's quite nasty if you can apply it to a weapon with ANTI-INFANTRY X.
Good, it’s not totally exploitable. It still encourages you to spend the same points to have 4 times the number of objective and miracle dice instead of one block on a single objective.
It’s the thin end of the wedge with the ballistic skill going down. First they came for the bolter, then they came for the wounds and attacks, then they came for the ballistic skill. Next it will be 4 up armour and BS4 plus for all guns and you’ll still be telling me this isn’t a nerf or diluting the armies theme. Look at a marine profile in third edition next to a Sister of Battle. The marine profile is absurd now, yet the Sisters profile and points has stayed the same. It’s an overpriced horde unit, not solid mid tier infantry.
Wayniac wrote: Not being able to score at all, even uncontested, with 0 OC means battle shock is going to be critical, and also means if immunity to it stays, those units will be head and shoulders above the rest.
Rip plague marines I guess.
In my opinion, if synapse isn't making stuff immune to battle shock, nothing is.
That said, I don't understand your comment about plague marines, can you please explain?
I was thinking of poxwalkers are immune they will outclass plague marines yet again as the "go to" troop choice because they can't be shut down. Just like when PMs were too expensive and it was zombie hordes for days.
Hopefully not though.
I doubt Poxwalkers will have much of an Objective Control.
Well, they’re saying the combat patrols are evenly matched. There’s no way sisters are a third the points value of a chaos marine or intercessor since their combat patrols fairly similar numbers wise.
Totalwar1402 wrote: Well, they’re saying the combat patrols are evenly matched. There’s no way sisters are a third the points value of a chaos marine or intercessor since their combat patrols fairly similar numbers wise.
They also said that they were making the difference up with skills and abilities for combat patrols that were not evenly matched, so it's a wash.
So unless they’re 7 to 8 points a model I don’t see them being viable as line infantry.
I have absolutely no proof, but I'm sure that 40K is about to receive the AoS 3.0 treatment : a massive point increase for everyone, making the armies a lot smaller and thus, "solving" the problem of the prices because you will need less models to play 1K or 2K games.
When you come from 40K, you often feel that you are playing a 1K5 points game despite it being a 2K points.
We can say safely they haven't, a small uptick across the board. The www.warhammer40000.com site has pics of a crusade roster.
Primaris tech marine is 80, currently 70
Unit of infiltrators is 220, currently 200.
I see the Crusade article is up, and it does demonstrate another use for Critical Wounds, with the Precise Weapon Modification (CW gain the PRECISION ability). I can't recall off-hand what we've seen about PRECISION to date, if anything, but I find it a little that it kicks in on the Wound step - it feels like something that makes more sense on a hit. On the other hand, given it is a CW, the hit would've wounded anyway, so maybe it isn't as odd as I'm thinking - and that's quite nasty if you can apply it to a weapon with ANTI-INFANTRY X.
Precision is likely (not 100%) being able to target a character (or specific model) while they're part of a unit.
Just a thought regarding the number of miracle dice. It seems that there may be more miracle dice generated than can be expected to be used in a battle, it could be that this is deliberate to compensate for the fact that low number miracle dice are all but useless with the way leadership tests work in 10th.
Totalwar1402 wrote: Because Sisters shouldn’t have 5 model units being objective counters. Sisters of battle should, like in the art, have blocks of infantry that move onto an objective and mean the enemy has to invest in shifting them off. It should be both viable to do that and you shouldn’t incentivise players to break the game by getting two or even four units of 5 on one objective to harvest double miracle dice.
So marines get bolter discipline baked in but sacred rites and anti psychic saves go? Plus keeping their -1 AP, getting advance and fire and the heavy key word to hit on 2 plus if they stay still. Intercessors should be 3 times more expensive than a Sister of Battle if you’re going to keep heaping bonuses on them.
It’s not 3rd edition. A 3 plus save doesn’t matter even without AP. Why do you think they gave marines 2 wounds?
Blocks are useful for Sisters. Units dying get you dice. Units that are wounded get you more effective units.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
ERJAK wrote: I didn't even see the BS thing. There's really no point in bringing guns with sisters.
If you say so, but you'll be able to hit on 2s often.
And for all we know, an Intercessor IS three times as expensive as a Sister. They could be four times as expensive, or twice, or a hundred times. We don't know yet.
Could you please not be giving GW any strange ideas.
Totalwar1402 wrote: Good, it’s not totally exploitable. It still encourages you to spend the same points to have 4 times the number of objective and miracle dice instead of one block on a single objective.
It’s the thin end of the wedge with the ballistic skill going down. First they came for the bolter, then they came for the wounds and attacks, then they came for the ballistic skill. Next it will be 4 up armour and BS4 plus for all guns and you’ll still be telling me this isn’t a nerf or diluting the armies theme. Look at a marine profile in third edition next to a Sister of Battle. The marine profile is absurd now, yet the Sisters profile and points has stayed the same. It’s an overpriced horde unit, not solid mid tier infantry.
Very dramatic. Pound for pound Sisters can kick the crap out of Intercessors.
Totalwar1402 wrote: Good, it’s not totally exploitable. It still encourages you to spend the same points to have 4 times the number of objective and miracle dice instead of one block on a single objective.
It’s the thin end of the wedge with the ballistic skill going down. First they came for the bolter, then they came for the wounds and attacks, then they came for the ballistic skill. Next it will be 4 up armour and BS4 plus for all guns and you’ll still be telling me this isn’t a nerf or diluting the armies theme. Look at a marine profile in third edition next to a Sister of Battle. The marine profile is absurd now, yet the Sisters profile and points has stayed the same. It’s an overpriced horde unit, not solid mid tier infantry.
Very dramatic. Pound for pound Sisters can kick the crap out of Intercessors.
11 points for a Sister of Battle
18 point for that intercessor gets you double the wounds, double the attacks, extra WS, extra strength, extra toughness, longer range gun, ap on said gun.
Theyre pretty much in the same points bracket but ones stupidly better than the other. There is a reason people just use the to get special and heavy weapons in the army or take other units. If you got two sisters of Battle with bolters they would lose to an intercessor. Just the attacks and wounds alone do that. Never mind all the other free stuff you get without any justification.
Totalwar1402 wrote: It should be both viable to do that and you shouldn’t incentivise players to break the game by getting two or even four units of 5 on one objective to harvest double miracle dice.
The Mira le dice are per objective, they don’t generate more from having a second or third unit on that objective.
At this point I’m annoyed by everything about 40k rules and there isn’t much to gain from anything about the them. On this one point it is just one miracle die per objective though.
Totalwar1402 wrote: It should be both viable to do that and you shouldn’t incentivise players to break the game by getting two or even four units of 5 on one objective to harvest double miracle dice.
The Mira le dice are per objective, they don’t generate more from having a second or third unit on that objective.
At this point I’m annoyed by everything about 40k rules and there isn’t much to gain from anything about the them. On this one point it is just one miracle die per objective though.
Fine, it’s still an incentive for people to get four times the objective potential, effective protection from damage by overkill, being easier to hide and this new bonus; for free.
Totalwar1402 wrote: It’s the thin end of the wedge with the ballistic skill going down. First they came for the bolter, then they came for the wounds and attacks, then they came for the ballistic skill. Next it will be 4 up armour and BS4 plus for all guns and you’ll still be telling me this isn’t a nerf or diluting the armies theme. Look at a marine profile in third edition next to a Sister of Battle. The marine profile is absurd now, yet the Sisters profile and points has stayed the same. It’s an overpriced horde unit, not solid mid tier infantry.
Your ballistic skill hasn't gone down. Your sisters still hit on the same 3+ with their heavy weapons if they don't move and 4+ if they do and there may be a generic stratagem to make an infantry unit count as stationary even if it moves. That's the same as it is now just instead of a -1 when moving it's a +1 for standing still.
18 point for that intercessor gets you double the wounds, double the attacks, extra WS, extra strength, extra toughness, longer range gun, ap on said gun.
Theyre pretty much in the same points bracket but ones stupidly better than the other. There is a reason people just use the to get special and heavy weapons in the army or take other units. If you got two sisters of Battle with bolters they would lose to an intercessor. Just the attacks and wounds alone do that. Never mind all the other free stuff you get without any justification.
Can I see your source that these points values are staying the same in 10th edition?
Totalwar1402 wrote: It’s the thin end of the wedge with the ballistic skill going down. First they came for the bolter, then they came for the wounds and attacks, then they came for the ballistic skill. Next it will be 4 up armour and BS4 plus for all guns and you’ll still be telling me this isn’t a nerf or diluting the armies theme. Look at a marine profile in third edition next to a Sister of Battle. The marine profile is absurd now, yet the Sisters profile and points has stayed the same. It’s an overpriced horde unit, not solid mid tier infantry.
Your ballistic skill hasn't gone down. Your sisters still hit on the same 3+ with their heavy weapons if they don't move and 4+ if they do and there may be a generic stratagem to make an infantry unit count as stationary even if it moves. That's the same as it is now just instead of a -1 when moving it's a +1 for standing still.
18 point for that intercessor gets you double the wounds, double the attacks, extra WS, extra strength, extra toughness, longer range gun, ap on said gun.
Theyre pretty much in the same points bracket but ones stupidly better than the other. There is a reason people just use the to get special and heavy weapons in the army or take other units. If you got two sisters of Battle with bolters they would lose to an intercessor. Just the attacks and wounds alone do that. Never mind all the other free stuff you get without any justification.
Can I see your source that these points values are staying the same in 10th edition?
Combat patrols.
Sisters have similar models to the Chaos Marine box. This suggests they’re staying in the overpriced margin of being roughly the same price instead of getting a massive cut in points. Which at that nerfed profile they should. I mean I just noticed they gave them Guard leadership as well because of course they have. Making taking units of 20 of them even more unviable. 11 points is vastly over costing that 3 plus armour save. Especially when for 18 points I can get twice as many at a higher toughness with a more lethal opponent.
You can’t have it both ways. Either Sisters are marine lite or they’re a horde army. Marine players want to have the best units in the game but not pay the points for them and be told they can bring less models to a game. If your unit is three times better, you pay three times as many points.
Totalwar1402 wrote: If you got two sisters of Battle with bolters they would lose to an intercessor. Just the attacks and wounds alone do that. Never mind all the other free stuff you get without any justification.
...two SOB have the same number of wounds as one Intercessor, put out the same number of shots (though without the AP) at 24", and double the shots at 12". I think they're one attack down in melee, and will hit at one less S (and WS, apparently), but I think this comes down to the dice - it is nowhere near as clear-cut as you're trying to present it.
Totalwar1402 wrote: If you got two sisters of Battle with bolters they would lose to an intercessor. Just the attacks and wounds alone do that. Never mind all the other free stuff you get without any justification.
...two SOB have the same number of wounds as one Intercessor, put out the same number of shots (though without the AP) at 24", and double the shots at 12". I think they're one attack down in melee, and will hit at one less S (and WS, apparently), but I think this comes down to the dice - it is nowhere near as clear-cut as you're trying to present it.
Plus the SoB can benefit from Miracle Dice to ensure a save. It’s a native rule, and one you can’t simply ignore.
Totalwar1402 wrote: It’s the thin end of the wedge with the ballistic skill going down. First they came for the bolter, then they came for the wounds and attacks, then they came for the ballistic skill. Next it will be 4 up armour and BS4 plus for all guns and you’ll still be telling me this isn’t a nerf or diluting the armies theme. Look at a marine profile in third edition next to a Sister of Battle. The marine profile is absurd now, yet the Sisters profile and points has stayed the same. It’s an overpriced horde unit, not solid mid tier infantry.
Your ballistic skill hasn't gone down. Your sisters still hit on the same 3+ with their heavy weapons if they don't move and 4+ if they do and there may be a generic stratagem to make an infantry unit count as stationary even if it moves. That's the same as it is now just instead of a -1 when moving it's a +1 for standing still.
18 point for that intercessor gets you double the wounds, double the attacks, extra WS, extra strength, extra toughness, longer range gun, ap on said gun.
Theyre pretty much in the same points bracket but ones stupidly better than the other. There is a reason people just use the to get special and heavy weapons in the army or take other units. If you got two sisters of Battle with bolters they would lose to an intercessor. Just the attacks and wounds alone do that. Never mind all the other free stuff you get without any justification.
Can I see your source that these points values are staying the same in 10th edition?
Combat patrols.
Sisters have similar models to the Chaos Marine box. This suggests they’re staying in the overpriced margin of being roughly the same price instead of getting a massive cut in points. Which at that nerfed profile they should. I mean I just noticed they gave them Guard leadership as well because of course they have. Making taking units of 20 of them even more unviable. 11 points is vastly over costing that 3 plus armour save. Especially when for 18 points I can get twice as many at a higher toughness with a more lethal opponent.
You can’t have it both ways. Either Sisters are marine lite or they’re a horde army. Marine players want to have the best units in the game but not pay the points for them and be told they can bring less models to a game. If your unit is three times better, you pay three times as many points.
Combat Patrol is going to be a different game to standard 40k. If we look at the contents of the Combat Patrol boxes with 40k lenses on, then yes they do seem a bit odd at times. However as GW have shown the rules for each of those Combat Patrols is different to what one is used to in 40k.
So, it is not prudent to use Combat Patrol as a way to guess points cost for standard 40k.
Totalwar1402 wrote: If you got two sisters of Battle with bolters they would lose to an intercessor. Just the attacks and wounds alone do that. Never mind all the other free stuff you get without any justification.
...two SOB have the same number of wounds as one Intercessor, put out the same number of shots (though without the AP) at 24", and double the shots at 12". I think they're one attack down in melee, and will hit at one less S (and WS, apparently), but I think this comes down to the dice - it is nowhere near as clear-cut as you're trying to present it.
It is that cut and dry.
By giving a marine two wounds and two attacks that’s just two space marines put together. If you just gave them the extra attack and wound you should be looking at that kind of point increase they have already. Never mind all the over exponential boosts they get across the board.
The bolt rifle in 9th is better than a bolter because is has the AP and bolter discipline means you’re getting two shots as well.
Totalwar1402 wrote: It should be both viable to do that and you shouldn’t incentivise players to break the game by getting two or even four units of 5 on one objective to harvest double miracle dice.
The Mira le dice are per objective, they don’t generate more from having a second or third unit on that objective.
At this point I’m annoyed by everything about 40k rules and there isn’t much to gain from anything about the them. On this one point it is just one miracle die per objective though.
Fine, it’s still an incentive for people to get four times the objective potential, effective protection from damage by overkill, being easier to hide and this new bonus; for free.
No, it isn't. One unit camps an objective: I get 5 vp and a miracle die. Five units camp the same objective: I get 5 vp and a miracle die.
That's it.
The BSS card that we saw today didn't indicate maximum unit size; if memory serves, in 8th it was 20 and in 9th it was 15. So let's tell the story of 20, 15 and 5, assuming I'm using the Hallowed Martyrs Detachment:
With a unit of 20 sisters, as soon as one dies, the other 19 get +1 to hit on ANY and every attack, whether shooting or melee, with any weapon against any and every enemy for the rest of the game. Once they lose 11 models, the other 9 get +1 to wound on every attack melee or shooting, with every weapon against every enemy for the rest of the game. And if I attach a character or two that buff the unit? That's 20 models boosted.
At 15, the advantages aren't as strong - I'm only going to get 14 shots at +1 to hit, 7 shots at +1 to hit, +1 to wound, and only 15 models will benefit from attached characters.
At 5 models? You might as well not have a detachment ability at all- you're only getting 4 shots at +1 to hit, two at +1 to hit, +1 to wound, and at most you'd be buffing 5 models by attaching a character.
Literally the only reason to attach a character to a 5 woman unit is if that unit is Dominions, because then the character gets to hitch a ride in the Doms' Immolator where she can benefit from the scout move that the Doms grant their Immo.
Incentivized yet? You should be.
Oh, and by the way, stop saying Intercessors get extra range, because in 10th, they don't.
And when you talk about doctrines, don't pretend that marines get all three abilities for every turn of the game; they don't. They can use each doctrine ONCE, and only ever one per turn (actually a side-grade from 9th, and some might even argue a downgrade).
The Blood of Martyrs will absolutely take the Pepsi challenge with Doctrines... And if unit size is 20 in 10th and you build your army for Martyrdom, I think Blood of Martyrs is ABSOLUTELY the better detachment ability.
Folks complaining about the Heavy Bolter BS… you know it’s the same net result for BS4+ with a +1 for staying still in 10th as the previous BS3+ with -1 if you move?
Totalwar1402 wrote: Because Sisters shouldn’t have 5 model units being objective counters. Sisters of battle should, like in the art, have blocks of infantry that move onto an objective and mean the enemy has to invest in shifting them off. It should be both viable to do that and you shouldn’t incentivise players to break the game by getting two or even four units of 5 on one objective to harvest double miracle dice.
So marines get bolter discipline baked in but sacred rites and anti psychic saves go? Plus keeping their -1 AP, getting advance and fire and the heavy key word to hit on 2 plus if they stay still. Intercessors should be 3 times more expensive than a Sister of Battle if you’re going to keep heaping bonuses on them.
It’s not 3rd edition. A 3 plus save doesn’t matter even without AP. Why do you think they gave marines 2 wounds?
Blocks are useful for Sisters. Units dying get you dice. Units that are wounded get you more effective units.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
ERJAK wrote: I didn't even see the BS thing. There's really no point in bringing guns with sisters.
If you say so, but you'll be able to hit on 2s often.
You're wrong for a couple of reasons.
1. is that multimeltas are only 18" range now. Retributors will be moving every turn. Even with the Martyrdom bonus, you'll never be hitting on better than 3s.
2. The martyrdom bonus is mediocre and will almost never be relevant. Even if there IS significantly reduced lethality, that'll just means sisters squads are only being overkilled by 5 wounds instead of 15. Especially because the 3+ save means we don't benefit from cover (essentially).
Another big problem is that sisters guns top at S10. Infantry weapons cap at S9. That means even against rhinos, we're looking at 4s to hit 4s to wound for our now pitifully 18" range multimeltas. Compare that to the Lascannon that still wounds rhino chassis vehicles on 3s AND starts at BS 3+.
Obviously, this doesn't mean we'll be bad as a faction and points are 100% still the main determining factor, but they've shown off literally ALL of our guns and they all suck. Sisters were a melee army in 9th and they're doubling down on that here. Which is totally fine! Being a melee army is perfectly good!
I just wish people would stop pretending that martyrdom matters and the changes to heavy weapons doesn't
JohnnyHell wrote: Folks complaining about the Heavy Bolter BS… you know it’s the same net result for BS4+ with a +1 for staying still in 10th as the previous BS3+ with -1 if you move?
Thin end of the wedge mate. Next they’ll be taking armour down to 4 plus. They’re already giving them worse bolters and worse morale.
Also, it is a nerf if they decide to not give this to every other army in the game. If marines get BS5 which Intercessors do BTW that’s not exactly balanced. That would just be a “your power armour doesn’t work see”. The fact every space marine has a character profile for 18 points isn’t already under costed and silly enough as it is.
They are not going to cost marines appropriately and as long as killing a 2 wound marine is the standard for firepower, that’s going to hurt an army of overpriced T3 1W models.
JohnnyHell wrote: Folks complaining about the Heavy Bolter BS… you know it’s the same net result for BS4+ with a +1 for staying still in 10th as the previous BS3+ with -1 if you move?
Heavy bolters genuinely are exactly the same as they were. No problem there. It's Multimeltas that are...not quite as good.
Considering that was 99.99% of an SoB shooting phase, it just means they're doubling down melee. Which is fine.
JohnnyHell wrote: Folks complaining about the Heavy Bolter BS… you know it’s the same net result for BS4+ with a +1 for staying still in 10th as the previous BS3+ with -1 if you move?
Thin end of the wedge mate. Next they’ll be taking armour down to 4 plus. They’re already giving them worse bolters and worse morale.
Also, it is a nerf if they decide to not give this to every other army in the game. If marines get BS5 which Intercessors do BTW that’s not exactly balanced. That would just be a “your power armour doesn’t work see”.
They are not going to cost marines appropriately and as long as killing a 2 wound marine is the standard for firepower, that’s going to hurt an army of overpriced T3 1W models.
See this genuinely isn't correct. The only difference between old heavy bolters and new ones is that movement used to be a penalty, now staying still is a reward.
Exactly the same rule, just seen from a different direction.
Look I’ll be back here with the points because I already know they’re not going to cost these units correctly.
They’ve clearly got the idea that that armour save is the highest value item on the model and all the other profile boosts. Doubling wounds, doubling attacks, str, t, bonus BS on the gun; that’s all really cheap for the Intercessor.
Being a Horus Heresy player. That is pretty much a centurion stat line with less war gear and a pip less WS. So a fifty point model is being pushed as line infantry for one faction.
It will need to be around 7-8 for Sisters and 25 points for a marine. If they make Sisters fifteen points or something dumb like that because they overvalue the armour save and make the Intercessor 22 points they’re just trying to keep army sizes equivalent.
JohnnyHell wrote: Folks complaining about the Heavy Bolter BS… you know it’s the same net result for BS4+ with a +1 for staying still in 10th as the previous BS3+ with -1 if you move?
Better, even- unless I'm misremembering, Sustained Hits means two hits on a roll of 6. That means a heavy bolter hitting on 4+ with doubled 6s averages 0.67 hits, and at 3+ averages 0.83 hits.
So the heavy bolter has gotten a buff, just with the BS rejiggered a bit to fit with how Heavy works now. Seems to me like they're trying to 'flatten out' the weapon options and make the heavy bolter the peer of multimeltas and lascannons, not the 'cheap option'.
Edit: Also in the context of Intercessors vs Sisters, I have to point out that said shiny new heavy bolter mulches both of them equally well. The extra T and extra W don't do anything against mid-S, multi-damage weapons, and that's always been the weakness of W2 Marines. Intercessors will win straight-up slugfights against most infantry; it's not a fair comparison.
Totalwar1402 wrote: Look I’ll be back here with the points because I already know they’re not going to cost these units correctly.
They’ve clearly got the idea that that armour save is the highest value item on the model and all the other profile boosts. Doubling wounds, doubling attacks, str, t, bonus BS on the gun; that’s all really cheap for the Intercessor.
Being a Horus Heresy player. That is pretty much a centurion stat line with less war gear and a pip less WS. So a fifty point model is being pushed as line infantry for one faction.
It will need to be around 7-8 for Sisters and 25 points for a marine. If they make Sisters fifteen points or something dumb like that because they overvalue the armour save and make the Intercessor 22 points they’re just trying to keep army sizes equivalent.
To be fair, battle sisters don't matter. They've never been relevant to the strength of the army and I doubt that's going to start with 10th.
Regardless of points, you'll never take more than 2 minimum units of BSS anyway. None of their guns matter because no one will ever take them, their statlines don't matter, their points costs don't matter. Ballistic skills, save, toughness, weaponskill, attacks, blood of martyrs, even the simulacrum, none of that matters.
The only two things that matter are 1. Cherub. 2. Defenders of the Faith. Every sisters of battle army will take exactly 2 units of battle sisters to act as miracle dice batteries on the 2 easiest to secure objectives. They will pay for themselves 100 times over in that capacity. Don't give them upgrades, don't pay for extra bodies, just collect the extra miracle dice to spend on your good units.
By maximizing our resources, I would bet good money that Sister's of Battle's close combat units will more than make up for the fact that we can't shoot our way out of a wet paper bag.
Wow. All this angst over the Sister of Battle Preview has me puzzled. Here is what I see:
Acts of Faith: It is awesome that they retained the Miracle Dice mechanic into 10th Edition and it is the Faction Rule. Best version of the faith rules IMHO. I like that they eased up on the rules a bit while simplifying them. No Phase limits on gaining dice. No one unit per phase limit on using dice. Only two basic ways to gain also keeps it simple.
The big downside is that 1's are pretty much useless except for Martyring models/units. I suppose you can also churn them out with Cherubs. 2 will be useful in Hallowed Martyrs Detachment since a Meltagun or Exorcist Missile Launcher hitting on 2's will not be an uncommon occurrence.
The Blood of Martyrs: A nice and simple upgrade to the Martyred Lady Order Conviction. Increased Hit once you take any damage in a unit and increased Wound below half Strength could be considerable bonus. Will definitely encourage larger units to allow you to take casualties and gain maximum benefits (like hitting on 2s with Meltaguns).
Triumph of Saint Katherine: That is looking pretty nice. An 18 Would Leader model? I wonder who they can join?
Battle Sister Squad: Pretty much a straight porting over of the unit from 10th Edition. Interesting changes which I am sure will be felt by many a unit in many a faction: Meltaguns are not Assault; 18" Range on Multi-Meltas. I love Defenders of the Faith and the new SI Wargear Rule. This unit should have a place in your army if priced correctly.
Exorcist Weapons: Looking pretty good compared to 9th Edition. Conflagration Rockets with Blast, Heavy, Ignores Cover, and Indirect Fire while having 3+ BS. This model will rain death on any light Infantry unit in the game no matter where they hide. Lose one Wound, don't move, and you are hitting Indirect Targets on a 2+!
The Exorcist Missile Launcher isn't taking a nap either. S10 means it wounds Light Tanks on a 3+ and Medium Tanks (like the Gladiator) on a 4+. AP -2 is better than a Battlecannon (even if a far fall from the days of AP1 Melta missiles) and will be great for breaking Heavy Infantry. I do expect the Castigator battle cannon will be doing the job of heavy tank destroyer for the faction.
Morvenn Vahl's Lance of Illumination: She's no Primarch, but it hits like a Master-crafted Thunderhammer or make a good number of quality low strength attacks. The only real complaint is it isn't better than before, but it isn't for smashing vehicles either.
Rejoice the Fallen: Now there is a nice stratagem. Don't plink away at a descent sized Sisters squad you are abound to charge. You are inviting some holy retribution!
Overall, I am pleased with what I've seen so far. There is lots to see, especially points values and what happened to the Combi-Flamer/Melta/Plasma. A kitted 10-model Battle Sisters Squad better be close to the same cost as 5 kitted Intercessors or there will be issues.
You know, all this talk of Battle Sisters squads and the like has me idly curious how viable mechanized sisters will be. If their Rhinos end up basically the same as Marine Rhinos, that means 2 fire points you can have your special/heavy weapons fire out of from comparative safety while rolling up the battlefield. Its not like a bog standard bolter is the primary damage dealer of the squad.
Obviously too soon to tell, but then again half the talk in this thread has been that.
kurhanik wrote: You know, all this talk of Battle Sisters squads and the like has me idly curious how viable mechanized sisters will be. If their Rhinos end up basically the same as Marine Rhinos, that means 2 fire points you can have your special/heavy weapons fire out of from comparative safety while rolling up the battlefield. Its not like a bog standard bolter is the primary damage dealer of the squad.
Obviously too soon to tell, but then again half the talk in this thread has been that.
I could see mech lists being okay. You still struggle with having no meaningful way to interact with anything higher than T9, but you'd at least have a lot more opportunity to shoot.
You wouldn't put BSS in the rhinos though. They're WAY more useful generating miracle dice.
Totalwar1402 wrote: Look I’ll be back here with the points because I already know they’re not going to cost these units correctly.
.
To be fair, battle sisters don't matter. They've never been relevant to the strength of the army and I doubt that's going to start with 10th.
Regardless of points, you'll never take more than 2 minimum units of BSS anyway. None of their guns matter because no one will ever take them, their statlines don't matter, their points costs don't matter. Ballistic skills, save, toughness, weaponskill, attacks, blood of martyrs, even the simulacrum, none of that matters.
The only two things that matter are 1. Cherub. 2. Defenders of the Faith. Every sisters of battle army will take exactly 2 units of battle sisters to act as miracle dice batteries on the 2 easiest to secure objectives. They will pay for themselves 100 times over in that capacity. Don't give them upgrades, don't pay for extra bodies, just collect the extra miracle dice to spend on your good units.
By maximizing our resources, I would bet good money that Sister's of Battle's close combat units will more than make up for the fact that we can't shoot our way out of a wet paper bag.
They’re literally the iconic unit in the army.
Every army in general should be built around its troops in any system and in general. If that’s not happening the games broke and isn’t working. But for Sisters specifically that’s much more the case. The idea or fantasy of the army is a fanatical horde of these fanatics singing to the God Emperor as they launch procession of fire. Not, a small elite strike force that uses small elite units to deliver knockout blows. Again, that’s Eldar and SoB should not play like Eldar.
Hmm, looks awkwardly at the 100 he’s got across two armies. Looks back to you.
I am interested in enjoying the game. That doesn’t mean I come 1st in a tournament. That means I can pick the army I like and have a decent run in a friendly game with my mate. That means not having 20 blocks of overcosted Battle Sisters mown down or cut to pieces by cheaper units.
Like to me it’s a bad thing that you have a mechanic that pushes players towards getting as few troops and using them to camp objectives as well as 20 models.
Oh I think the close combat units will be fine. They seem to be keeping the glass cannon. Not sure how points and if they’ll remember vehicles are really tough now. Hopefully the Castigator makes up for that.
The other unit I am curious about is Paragons. Judging by most of the codex this does feel like they won’t change too much which is a shame because they’re in a weird place durability wise and eye wateringly expensive.
Totalwar1402 wrote: Because Sisters shouldn’t have 5 model units being objective counters. Sisters of battle should, like in the art, have blocks of infantry that move onto an objective and mean the enemy has to invest in shifting them off. It should be both viable to do that and you shouldn’t incentivise players to break the game by getting two or even four units of 5 on one objective to harvest double miracle dice.
So marines get bolter discipline baked in but sacred rites and anti psychic saves go? Plus keeping their -1 AP, getting advance and fire and the heavy key word to hit on 2 plus if they stay still. Intercessors should be 3 times more expensive than a Sister of Battle if you’re going to keep heaping bonuses on them.
It’s not 3rd edition. A 3 plus save doesn’t matter even without AP. Why do you think they gave marines 2 wounds?
Blocks are useful for Sisters. Units dying get you dice. Units that are wounded get you more effective units.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
ERJAK wrote: I didn't even see the BS thing. There's really no point in bringing guns with sisters.
If you say so, but you'll be able to hit on 2s often.
You're wrong for a couple of reasons.
1. is that multimeltas are only 18" range now. Retributors will be moving every turn. Even with the Martyrdom bonus, you'll never be hitting on better than 3s.
2. The martyrdom bonus is mediocre and will almost never be relevant. Even if there IS significantly reduced lethality, that'll just means sisters squads are only being overkilled by 5 wounds instead of 15. Especially because the 3+ save means we don't benefit from cover (essentially).
Another big problem is that sisters guns top at S10. Infantry weapons cap at S9. That means even against rhinos, we're looking at 4s to hit 4s to wound for our now pitifully 18" range multimeltas. Compare that to the Lascannon that still wounds rhino chassis vehicles on 3s AND starts at BS 3+.
Obviously, this doesn't mean we'll be bad as a faction and points are 100% still the main determining factor, but they've shown off literally ALL of our guns and they all suck. Sisters were a melee army in 9th and they're doubling down on that here. Which is totally fine! Being a melee army is perfectly good!
I just wish people would stop pretending that martyrdom matters and the changes to heavy weapons doesn't
Oh how dare they have a different opinion than you!
Wayniac wrote: Not being able to score at all, even uncontested, with 0 OC means battle shock is going to be critical, and also means if immunity to it stays, those units will be head and shoulders above the rest.
Rip plague marines I guess.
In my opinion, if synapse isn't making stuff immune to battle shock, nothing is.
That said, I don't understand your comment about plague marines, can you please explain?
Beyond that I see too many mechanics triggered/triggering off Battle Shock for anything to have an immunity. Immunity to Battleshock also means immunity to much of the Daemons army rule.
I'm a little unimpressed with Acts of Faith mostly in the production of miracle dice. Comparing it to some of the other similar abilities its just harder to apply. It's got both the "Control Objectives to trigger full value" and "Doesn't automatically affect everyone" issue. I mean Daemons have to control objectives for more value, but it affects everyone. Marines don't have to control objectives but 3 out of 5ish turns means it doesn't affect everyone. Sisters appear to have been hit with both. Have to wait and see, but it doesn't look good.
Totalwar1402 wrote: Good, it’s not totally exploitable. It still encourages you to spend the same points to have 4 times the number of objective and miracle dice instead of one block on a single objective.
It’s the thin end of the wedge with the ballistic skill going down. First they came for the bolter, then they came for the wounds and attacks, then they came for the ballistic skill. Next it will be 4 up armour and BS4 plus for all guns and you’ll still be telling me this isn’t a nerf or diluting the armies theme. Look at a marine profile in third edition next to a Sister of Battle. The marine profile is absurd now, yet the Sisters profile and points has stayed the same. It’s an overpriced horde unit, not solid mid tier infantry.
Very dramatic. Pound for pound Sisters can kick the crap out of Intercessors.
11 points for a Sister of Battle
18 point for that intercessor gets you double the wounds, double the attacks, extra WS, extra strength, extra toughness, longer range gun, ap on said gun.
Theyre pretty much in the same points bracket but ones stupidly better than the other. There is a reason people just use the to get special and heavy weapons in the army or take other units. If you got two sisters of Battle with bolters they would lose to an intercessor. Just the attacks and wounds alone do that. Never mind all the other free stuff you get without any justification.
For one you quote 9e points. Last i checked we don't know 10e points.
Double wounds also doesn't double durability in 40k. Aos yes, 40k no.(assuming no unrevealed huge change but as it was played on fest one would assume such a core change would have leaked)
I'm a little unimpressed with Acts of Faith mostly in the production of miracle dice. Comparing it to some of the other similar abilities its just harder to apply. It's got both the "Control Objectives to trigger full value" and "Doesn't automatically affect everyone" issue. I mean Daemons have to control objectives for more value, but it affects everyone. Marines don't have to control objectives but 3 out of 5ish turns means it doesn't affect everyone. Sisters appear to have been hit with both. Have to wait and see, but it doesn't look good.
Getting ~50 MD per game looks unimpressive to you ? Its way better than a reroll because you already know what you will get.
It’s the thin end of the wedge with the ballistic skill going down. First they came for the bolter, then they came for the wounds and attacks, then they came for the ballistic skill. Next it will be 4 up armour and BS4 plus for all guns and you’ll still be telling me this isn’t a nerf or diluting the armies theme. Look at a marine profile in third edition next to a Sister of Battle. The marine profile is absurd now, yet the Sisters profile and points has stayed the same. It’s an overpriced horde unit, not solid mid tier infantry.
Ork players have a reputation on this site for being the guys running around with those "the end is nigh" signs whenever anything happens anywhere in the game.
As an Ork player, please take a moment to stop panicking. We'll just have to wait and see how SoB fully turn out. If they're awful, I'll let you borrow my sign
There's far too much gnashing of teeth and jumping to conclusions in here, I think the dreaded "WaIt AnD sEe" is needed.
Outside of that, worth reminding people that you can't simultaneously priase that your vehicles are tougher/more useful whilst in the same post complaining you'll have a harder time killing vehicles.
Regards the whole intercessor thing, it'll never be a fair comparison because they didn't exist previously. Instead look at a tac marine, they were 12 points iirc? they went to 2 wounds and got placed at 18 points. They didn't gain an extra attack, they didn't get a better gun, no extra perks and I'm pretty sure plasma deletes the 18pt version as easily as the 12pt version, which in turn has reduced firepower for their troubles.
Wayniac wrote: Not being able to score at all, even uncontested, with 0 OC means battle shock is going to be critical, and also means if immunity to it stays, those units will be head and shoulders above the rest.
Rip plague marines I guess.
In my opinion, if synapse isn't making stuff immune to battle shock, nothing is.
That said, I don't understand your comment about plague marines, can you please explain?
I was thinking of poxwalkers are immune they will outclass plague marines yet again as the "go to" troop choice because they can't be shut down. Just like when PMs were too expensive and it was zombie hordes for days.
Hopefully not though.
I don't think they will be immune though, maybe even the opposite. Distracting a horde of mindless zombies away from what their commander wants shouldn't be too difficult.
I also think it's pretty much a given that plague marines will be OC2 while pox walkers will just be OC1, and killing 3 plague marines is still harder than killing 6 poxwalkers.
In the end, it just boils down to how many points each of them is.
It’s not 3rd edition. A 3 plus save doesn’t matter even without AP. Why do you think they gave marines 2 wounds?
Can you elaborate on this please? I think I am misreading. Are you saying that even in situations where the defender is being hit with an AP 0 wry, a 3+ save is useless? Or just that certain factions find it useless?
It’s not 3rd edition. A 3 plus save doesn’t matter even without AP. Why do you think they gave marines 2 wounds?
Can you elaborate on this please? I think I am misreading. Are you saying that even in situations where the defender is being hit with an AP 0 wry, a 3+ save is useless? Or just that certain factions find it useless?
I'm assuming they're referring to the lethality of AP / Rending since 8th edition which got more lethal in 9th edition where often times a 3+ save doesn't matter when you're facing huge volley's of shots with AP-2 or AP-3 which for some armies was relatively easy to put out. This in turn led to band-aids like Armour of Contempt and Invul proliferation for better or worse. Thankfully we are seeing an AP drop across the board in the 10th previews and I am hopeful that a 3+ Save will not be as easily circumvented. We shall see.
H.B.M.C. wrote: It's called hysterical hyperbole, I believe.
Of course 3+ saves matter.
They matter more now, in fact. AP does seem to be going down across the board, especially with a lot of the small arms that we've seen that were previously -1AP. If that trend continues, a 3+ save will be much more useful than it is now.
It also looks like SoB players may well end up with a lot of Miracle Dice now. If that's the case, you need to factor the improved efficiency in to any evaluation of your units. If you have a lot of MD, and you're getting easy access to +1 to hit thanks to the Martyrdom rule, you can use any MD with a value of 2 to hit with things like non-moving HB, Exorcists, etc.
It’s not 3rd edition. A 3 plus save doesn’t matter even without AP. Why do you think they gave marines 2 wounds?
Can you elaborate on this please? I think I am misreading. Are you saying that even in situations where the defender is being hit with an AP 0 wry, a 3+ save is useless? Or just that certain factions find it useless?
I'm assuming they're referring to the lethality of AP / Rending since 8th edition which got more lethal in 9th edition where often times a 3+ save doesn't matter when you're facing huge volley's of shots with AP-2 or AP-3 which for some armies was relatively easy to put out. This in turn led to band-aids like Armour of Contempt and Invul proliferation for better or worse. Thankfully we are seeing an AP drop across the board in the 10th previews and I am hopeful that a 3+ Save will not be as easily circumvented. We shall see.
Except he says 3+ is irrelevant even when ap is 0. Ie you saving on 3+.
Slipspace wrote: They matter more now, in fact. AP does seem to be going down across the board, especially with a lot of the small arms that we've seen that were previously -1AP. If that trend continues, a 3+ save will be much more useful than it is now.
Like I said when they first started talking about save mods in 10th, I'm hoping that this is a middle ground between the all-or-nothing saves of 3rd-7th (where 3+ saves mattered so much that everyone played around them), and the "everything has a save mod" nonsense of 2nd and 8th/9th (where 3+ saves mattered so little, as you never got to ever take one, and GW had to invent bull gak bandaids like AoC rather than fix the issue!).
I'm a little unimpressed with Acts of Faith mostly in the production of miracle dice. Comparing it to some of the other similar abilities its just harder to apply. It's got both the "Control Objectives to trigger full value" and "Doesn't automatically affect everyone" issue. I mean Daemons have to control objectives for more value, but it affects everyone. Marines don't have to control objectives but 3 out of 5ish turns means it doesn't affect everyone. Sisters appear to have been hit with both. Have to wait and see, but it doesn't look good.
Getting ~50 MD per game looks unimpressive to you ? Its way better than a reroll because you already know what you will get.
Not sure where you're getting 50. One per turn, one per Sister Squad(s) on an objective on your turn - assuming a 50/50 3 of 6 objectives for five turns (even being on three turn 1 Command Phase is unlikely) is 15 plus 10 for 25. Beyond that you're either in a laugher or you're losing squads which means those lost squads aren't getting to use your dice. There's certainly more to see, but their mechanic looks more painful than Doctrines, Dark Pacts, etc.
It’s not 3rd edition. A 3 plus save doesn’t matter even without AP. Why do you think they gave marines 2 wounds?
Can you elaborate on this please? I think I am misreading. Are you saying that even in situations where the defender is being hit with an AP 0 wry, a 3+ save is useless? Or just that certain factions find it useless?
I'm assuming they're referring to the lethality of AP / Rending since 8th edition which got more lethal in 9th edition where often times a 3+ save doesn't matter when you're facing huge volley's of shots with AP-2 or AP-3 which for some armies was relatively easy to put out. This in turn led to band-aids like Armour of Contempt and Invul proliferation for better or worse. Thankfully we are seeing an AP drop across the board in the 10th previews and I am hopeful that a 3+ Save will not be as easily circumvented. We shall see.
In Third Edition when the Sisters stat line was set up, shooting was far weaker than it is modern 40k even if you ignore AP entirely. You have an extra Bs, increased strength, more shots, rerolls and bonuses to wound coming out the ears. Plus special weapons are vastly cheaper.
So your ten man tactical squad would have a few bolters, maybe a plasma gun and a lascannon if you wanted to spend crazy points. So your armour would protect you from bolts shells and you’d lose a few people to special weapons. The danger would be getting overmatched in close combat and that toughness allowing marine to shrug off return bolter fire.
Now, your Intercessor squad has double the number of shots, hitting on 2 plus, can get bonus rerolls and all that stuff we have to look forward to. That is vastly more firepower than any third edition Space Marine unit. Whilst Sisters are exactly the same durability and points cost.
Give an example. I did a game against Tau, they just got a few stratagems and characters. Those pulse rifles just chewed up any Sisters unit they shot at. Same game in 3rd those pulse rifles would be doing a fraction of the damage because you couldn’t hurl all these boosts at them.
AP is not the only place damage is coming from.
This is by intent. They want to make the game more exciting so that when you roll dice you’re always impacting the game. Problem is Sisters are either overcosted or the profile seriously needed looking because it’s as easy to kill them as it was in 3rd edition.
You keep referring for stuff they get in future and current point costs. That's just fallacity. You either refer current rules and points or future rules and points.
Anything else and you admit for being dishonest arqument and just interested in causing trouble.
tneva82 wrote: You keep referring for stuff they get in future and current point costs. That's just fallacity. You either refer current rules and points or future rules and points.
Anything else and you admit for being dishonest arqument and just interested in causing trouble.
Cute.
I’ve seen enough to know where the winds going. Damage is still absurdly high. Sisters profile got worse. Marines got better. Saying that combat patrols are balanced when they have same models as marines. Rules that encourage taking minimum size squads which is gamey and silly.
Everything they put out just confirms that they’re doubling down on this stupid idea that the Sisters of Battle Intercessors should be in same bracket because “ohhh 3 plus armour” and that giving them a Centurion from Heresy’s profile is just a little added extra.
It’s stupid and it just means people will carry on taking weird sisters lists that have two lots of five sisters because they’re overcosted.
So no, I am going to list precedents like points cost. A Sister of Battle with a bolt gun should be a third the points cost of an Intercessor.
Totalwar1402 wrote: Rules that encourage taking minimum size squads which is gamey and silly.
But the rules are also encouraging you to take maxed-out squads, too, aren't they? Your Battle Sisters aren't going to generate those extra dice if they're not holding an objective, so you want to avoid taking battleshock tests. Plus, of course, the whole +1 to wound thing being a lot better on 5 Sisters than on 2.
All the while, the benefits inherent to MSU are still there, so what you have is a trade-off situation – interesting, impactful choices are better game design, right?
Totalwar1402 wrote: Rules that encourage taking minimum size squads which is gamey and silly.
But the rules are also encouraging you to take maxed-out squads, too, aren't they? Your Battle Sisters aren't going to generate those extra dice if they're not holding an objective, so you want to avoid taking battleshock tests. Plus, of course, the whole +1 to wound thing being a lot better on 5 Sisters than on 2.
All the while, the benefits inherent to MSU are still there, so what you have is a trade-off situation – interesting, impactful choices are better game design, right?
I had the same thought. While I was reading a few of the previews I was thinking to myself I'm glad they've included a few tweaks here and there that benefit taking larger squads.
I'm away from my dexes right now, but I don't believe this to be true as written. I think you're still talking about the BS 4 on multimeltas, but marine BS went up on their heavy weapons as well- and as people have tried to explain to you half a dozen times, those changes have no functional effect on the game at all, because the penalty for moving and firing heavy weapons is gone in 10th, and there is now a new bonus to firing them when you stand still. You need to acknowledge in this thread that you understand this and stop being a troll.
If you genuinely don't understand that, tell us, and everyone who hasn't already tried to explain it will try in different words until you get it. Because WE all get it.
Saying that combat patrols are balanced when they have same models as marines.
I'm not sure what this is supposed to mean, but combat patrol is a completely different game. Data cards are different in at least some of the examples we've seen, we've been told that points values are likely to be different too.
Totalwar1402 wrote: Rules that encourage taking minimum size squads which is gamey and silly.
But the rules are also encouraging you to take maxed-out squads, too, aren't they? Your Battle Sisters aren't going to generate those extra dice if they're not holding an objective, so you want to avoid taking battleshock tests. Plus, of course, the whole +1 to wound thing being a lot better on 5 Sisters than on 2.
All the while, the benefits inherent to MSU are still there, so what you have is a trade-off situation – interesting, impactful choices are better game design, right?
A bigger squads more likely to take battle shock tests because it would have models left. If a 5 sister unit was actually targeted it would die; people rely on hiding them out of LOS. Also sisters morale going down means your large squads more likely to fail those tests.
A rule where you have to be losing the game to get special rules doesn’t seem very good.
MSU is too strong. It’s a way of exploiting the game. You pay same points for extra map control and effective damage protection by overkill. No downside to it at all for a unit you just want to secure objectives. Plus, it just does not suit the character of the Sisters army at all. So it’s not a trade off. People will carry on with their map control and now Faith dice.
I'm away from my dexes right now, but I don't believe this to be true as written. I think you're still talking about the BS 4 on multimeltas, but marine BS went up on their heavy weapons as well- and as people have tried to explain to you half a dozen times, those changes have no functional effect on the game at all, because the penalty for moving and firing heavy weapons is gone in 10th, and there is now a new bonus to firing them when you stand still. You need to acknowledge in this thread that you understand this and stop being a troll.
If you genuinely don't understand that, tell us, and everyone who hasn't already tried to explain it will try in different words until you get it. Because WE all get it.
Saying that combat patrols are balanced when they have same models as marines.
I'm not sure what this is supposed to mean, but combat patrol is a completely different game. Data cards are different in at least some of the examples we've seen, we've been told that points values are likely to be different too.
Damage as in number of dice, rerolls etc etc
Morale got worse for sisters. Marines got an extra attack, extra shot on the bolter, BS5 if they stand still and can advance and fire. You really want to tell me that model is still worth 11 points and an Intercessor 18 points.
Yes, I am sure they’re going to make Sisters 3 attacks and 2 wounds for combat patrol and they won’t just be tweaking and tucking a few things. ?
Snugiraffe wrote: But the rules are also encouraging you to take maxed-out squads, too, aren't they?
They aren't. The whole point of the 5-strong SoB squad is to be a cheap, disposable unit you can just throw around for whatever (scoring objectives or in this case generating Miracle Dice) so even if they get knocked out (Battleshock) then you just get another one to do the thing, and they are never buffed with anything anyway because they are like cheerleaders for the army rather than actual players. A 20-strong unit is just more expensive, less disposable due to the point sink, and more unwieldy - it has literally zero advantage for the role it is supposed to fulfill over 4 5-strong units. Maybe if you are thinking about using the unit for actual combat, but I can't see why would you ever think about that.
Unfortunately one of the problems with a long drawn out creeping reveal.
No one really knows what anything actually is but it promotes speculation only countered by "wait and see eveythng is fine" (until its not then its too late)
None of the Marines boosts are bad but they might be if they are not pointed well and GW and balance...sheesh...it ain't gonna happen
I'm a little unimpressed with Acts of Faith mostly in the production of miracle dice. Comparing it to some of the other similar abilities its just harder to apply. It's got both the "Control Objectives to trigger full value" and "Doesn't automatically affect everyone" issue. I mean Daemons have to control objectives for more value, but it affects everyone. Marines don't have to control objectives but 3 out of 5ish turns means it doesn't affect everyone. Sisters appear to have been hit with both. Have to wait and see, but it doesn't look good.
Getting ~50 MD per game looks unimpressive to you ? Its way better than a reroll because you already know what you will get.
Not sure where you're getting 50. One per turn, one per Sister Squad(s) on an objective on your turn - assuming a 50/50 3 of 6 objectives for five turns (even being on three turn 1 Command Phase is unlikely) is 15 plus 10 for 25. Beyond that you're either in a laugher or you're losing squads which means those lost squads aren't getting to use your dice. There's certainly more to see, but their mechanic looks more painful than Doctrines, Dark Pacts, etc.
Did you read the preview ? You get 1 each players turn, thats 10. Then you get 1 for each objective marker you hold with battle sisters. Lets say thats about 13 (your home marker and two in no mans land from turn 2 onwards). Then you get 1 for each friendly unit killed by the enemy. Thats 5-10 more. Whenever a simulacrum unit kills an enemy unit, you get 1. There are 5 sisters units currently which have the simulacrum ability. Lets say those kill 5-10 enemy units, thats 5-10 more. Add those up and you get to 33-43 dice. Thats just from the preview, im pretty sure there will be more ways to gain miracle dice. Cherubs will let you get rid of 1s and 2s you roll, because you immediately get one more dice.
Totalwar1402 wrote: Rules that encourage taking minimum size squads which is gamey and silly.
But the rules are also encouraging you to take maxed-out squads, too, aren't they? Your Battle Sisters aren't going to generate those extra dice if they're not holding an objective, so you want to avoid taking battleshock tests. Plus, of course, the whole +1 to wound thing being a lot better on 5 Sisters than on 2.
All the while, the benefits inherent to MSU are still there, so what you have is a trade-off situation – interesting, impactful choices are better game design, right?
A bigger squads more likely to take battle shock tests because it would have models left. If a 5 sister unit was actually targeted it would die; people rely on hiding them out of LOS. Also sisters morale going down means your large squads more likely to fail those tests.
A rule where you have to be losing the game to get special rules doesn’t seem very good.
MSU is too strong. It’s a way of exploiting the game. You pay same points for extra map control and effective damage protection by overkill. No downside to it at all for a unit you just want to secure objectives. Plus, it just does not suit the character of the Sisters army at all. So it’s not a trade off. People will carry on with their map control and now Faith dice.
I'm away from my dexes right now, but I don't believe this to be true as written. I think you're still talking about the BS 4 on multimeltas, but marine BS went up on their heavy weapons as well- and as people have tried to explain to you half a dozen times, those changes have no functional effect on the game at all, because the penalty for moving and firing heavy weapons is gone in 10th, and there is now a new bonus to firing them when you stand still. You need to acknowledge in this thread that you understand this and stop being a troll.
If you genuinely don't understand that, tell us, and everyone who hasn't already tried to explain it will try in different words until you get it. Because WE all get it.
Saying that combat patrols are balanced when they have same models as marines.
I'm not sure what this is supposed to mean, but combat patrol is a completely different game. Data cards are different in at least some of the examples we've seen, we've been told that points values are likely to be different too.
Damage as in number of dice, rerolls etc etc
Morale got worse for sisters. Marines got an extra attack, extra shot on the bolter, BS5 if they stand still and can advance and fire. You really want to tell me that model is still worth 11 points and an Intercessor 18 points.
Yes, I am sure they’re going to make Sisters 3 attacks and 2 wounds for combat patrol and they won’t just be tweaking and tucking a few things. ?
Combat Patrol is a non-issue. The current CP boxes were not designed with the new CP rules in mind, so we can't draw any conclusions from their contents. I'm fairly sure the entire mode was dreamed up by the money men, not the designers, to try to sell the CP boxes.
Damage is going down compared to 9th. The general reduction in -1AP is good evidence of that. Comparing anything to 3rd seems bizarre, especially when you simultaneously use Intercessors as a yardstick, who didn't even exist until 8th. 3rd was over 20 years ago now. Penitent asks a good question about your assertion over BS. Do you understand that BS for Heavy weapons didn't get worse for Sisters, in practice?
Almost everything you've said is looking through the lens of 9th edition (or, for some reason, 3rd). 10th is going to be a big rests in many ways. Even just your comment about MSU being too strong not to utilise may not be correct now. In fact, Sisters seem to have incentives to take a mix of MSU and larger squads due to the Miracle Dice generation and Martyrdom rules.
18 point for that intercessor gets you double the wounds, double the attacks, extra WS, extra strength, extra toughness, longer range gun, ap on said gun.
Theyre pretty much in the same points bracket but ones stupidly better than the other. There is a reason people just use the to get special and heavy weapons in the army or take other units. If you got two sisters of Battle with bolters they would lose to an intercessor. Just the attacks and wounds alone do that. Never mind all the other free stuff you get without any justification.
In a straight bolter fight? The Sisters get to wash the AP on the bolt rifle so the marine gets the advantage on wounding, but then when those two Sisters can get into RF range they have twice the shots. A basic intercessor in melee is only marginally more scary.
And if we were to imagine one of those Sisters dying and counting for half strength that remaining Sister now triples her output.
Mr Morden wrote: Unfortunately one of the problems with a long drawn out creeping reveal.
No one really knows what anything actually is but it promotes speculation only countered by "wait and see eveythng is fine" (until its not then its too late)
None of the Marines boosts are bad but they might be if they are not pointed well and GW and balance...sheesh...it ain't gonna happen
Indeed. It's also worth noting that the SM one is probably the most powerful we've seen so far, but also the most limited since it only applies to a single enemy unit per turn. Their detachment bonus is similar - powerful but not useful all the time. CSM, on the other hand, get lesser buffs, but across the entire army if they want.
Anyone declaring a faction broken or useless at this stage has no idea what they're talking about, and can be safely ignored. The fact Totalwar1402 was doomsaying well before the SoB reveal already calls into question any of their subsequent conclusions.
Totalwar1402 wrote: Rules that encourage taking minimum size squads which is gamey and silly.
But the rules are also encouraging you to take maxed-out squads, too, aren't they? Your Battle Sisters aren't going to generate those extra dice if they're not holding an objective, so you want to avoid taking battleshock tests. Plus, of course, the whole +1 to wound thing being a lot better on 5 Sisters than on 2.
All the while, the benefits inherent to MSU are still there, so what you have is a trade-off situation – interesting, impactful choices are better game design, right?
A bigger squads more likely to take battle shock tests because it would have models left. If a 5 sister unit was actually targeted it would die; people rely on hiding them out of LOS. Also sisters morale going down means your large squads more likely to fail those tests.
A rule where you have to be losing the game to get special rules doesn’t seem very good.
MSU is too strong. It’s a way of exploiting the game. You pay same points for extra map control and effective damage protection by overkill. No downside to it at all for a unit you just want to secure objectives. Plus, it just does not suit the character of the Sisters army at all. So it’s not a trade off. People will carry on with their map control and now Faith dice.
I'm away from my dexes right now, but I don't believe this to be true as written. I think you're still talking about the BS 4 on multimeltas, but marine BS went up on their heavy weapons as well- and as people have tried to explain to you half a dozen times, those changes have no functional effect on the game at all, because the penalty for moving and firing heavy weapons is gone in 10th, and there is now a new bonus to firing them when you stand still. You need to acknowledge in this thread that you understand this and stop being a troll.
If you genuinely don't understand that, tell us, and everyone who hasn't already tried to explain it will try in different words until you get it. Because WE all get it.
Saying that combat patrols are balanced when they have same models as marines.
I'm not sure what this is supposed to mean, but combat patrol is a completely different game. Data cards are different in at least some of the examples we've seen, we've been told that points values are likely to be different too.
Damage as in number of dice, rerolls etc etc
Morale got worse for sisters. Marines got an extra attack, extra shot on the bolter, BS5 if they stand still and can advance and fire. You really want to tell me that model is still worth 11 points and an Intercessor 18 points.
Yes, I am sure they’re going to make Sisters 3 attacks and 2 wounds for combat patrol and they won’t just be tweaking and tucking a few things. ?
Combat Patrol is a non-issue. The current CP boxes were not designed with the new CP rules in mind, so we can't draw any conclusions from their contents. I'm fairly sure the entire mode was dreamed up by the money men, not the designers, to try to sell the CP boxes.
Damage is going down compared to 9th. The general reduction in -1AP is good evidence of that. Comparing anything to 3rd seems bizarre, especially when you simultaneously use Intercessors as a yardstick, who didn't even exist until 8th. 3rd was over 20 years ago now. Penitent asks a good question about your assertion over BS. Do you understand that BS for Heavy weapons didn't get worse for Sisters, in practice?
Almost everything you've said is looking through the lens of 9th edition (or, for some reason, 3rd). 10th is going to be a big rests in many ways. Even just your comment about MSU being too strong not to utilise may not be correct now. In fact, Sisters seem to have incentives to take a mix of MSU and larger squads due to the Miracle Dice generation and Martyrdom rules.
Right, what do you think is the reasonable points costs for both those models?
Going back to third helps show how the Sisters units durability hasn’t changed in 20 years. But firepower and all these new units like Intercessors has skyrocketed. Yet they remain a similar points cost.
Yes, you get the same ballistic skill with that weaker multi melta as you did before. On a unit more likely to fail Battle shock. Whereas marines got double shots, heavy, can advance and fire. Extra attack baked in. Whilst Sisters lose all their sacred rites.
It’s barely changed I think you’re buying into the marketing if you think it’s a reset.
The larger units are likely to be sacresanct and Repentia whilst your objective campers are your little troops tax. That’s exactly what we have now and what I am complaining about.
ERJAK wrote: You're wrong for a couple of reasons.
1. is that multimeltas are only 18" range now. Retributors will be moving every turn. Even with the Martyrdom bonus, you'll never be hitting on better than 3s.
2. The martyrdom bonus is mediocre and will almost never be relevant. Even if there IS significantly reduced lethality, that'll just means sisters squads are only being overkilled by 5 wounds instead of 15. Especially because the 3+ save means we don't benefit from cover (essentially).
Another big problem is that sisters guns top at S10. Infantry weapons cap at S9. That means even against rhinos, we're looking at 4s to hit 4s to wound for our now pitifully 18" range multimeltas. Compare that to the Lascannon that still wounds rhino chassis vehicles on 3s AND starts at BS 3+.
Obviously, this doesn't mean we'll be bad as a faction and points are 100% still the main determining factor, but they've shown off literally ALL of our guns and they all suck. Sisters were a melee army in 9th and they're doubling down on that here. Which is totally fine! Being a melee army is perfectly good!
I just wish people would stop pretending that martyrdom matters and the changes to heavy weapons doesn't
I think the heavy consideration to be made is that the MM is no longer the be-all end-all. Meltaguns are going to be pretty useful as will HBs. We'll have to wait for the Retributor sheet to truly understand what MM can do for Sisters.
Totalwar1402 wrote: Rules that encourage taking minimum size squads which is gamey and silly.
But the rules are also encouraging you to take maxed-out squads, too, aren't they? Your Battle Sisters aren't going to generate those extra dice if they're not holding an objective, so you want to avoid taking battleshock tests. Plus, of course, the whole +1 to wound thing being a lot better on 5 Sisters than on 2.
All the while, the benefits inherent to MSU are still there, so what you have is a trade-off situation – interesting, impactful choices are better game design, right?
A bigger squads more likely to take battle shock tests because it would have models left. If a 5 sister unit was actually targeted it would die; people rely on hiding them out of LOS. Also sisters morale going down means your large squads more likely to fail those tests.
A rule where you have to be losing the game to get special rules doesn’t seem very good.
MSU is too strong. It’s a way of exploiting the game. You pay same points for extra map control and effective damage protection by overkill. No downside to it at all for a unit you just want to secure objectives. Plus, it just does not suit the character of the Sisters army at all. So it’s not a trade off. People will carry on with their map control and now Faith dice.
I'm away from my dexes right now, but I don't believe this to be true as written. I think you're still talking about the BS 4 on multimeltas, but marine BS went up on their heavy weapons as well- and as people have tried to explain to you half a dozen times, those changes have no functional effect on the game at all, because the penalty for moving and firing heavy weapons is gone in 10th, and there is now a new bonus to firing them when you stand still. You need to acknowledge in this thread that you understand this and stop being a troll.
If you genuinely don't understand that, tell us, and everyone who hasn't already tried to explain it will try in different words until you get it. Because WE all get it.
Saying that combat patrols are balanced when they have same models as marines.
I'm not sure what this is supposed to mean, but combat patrol is a completely different game. Data cards are different in at least some of the examples we've seen, we've been told that points values are likely to be different too.
Damage as in number of dice, rerolls etc etc
Morale got worse for sisters. Marines got an extra attack, extra shot on the bolter, BS5 if they stand still and can advance and fire. You really want to tell me that model is still worth 11 points and an Intercessor 18 points.
Yes, I am sure they’re going to make Sisters 3 attacks and 2 wounds for combat patrol and they won’t just be tweaking and tucking a few things. ?
Combat Patrol is a non-issue. The current CP boxes were not designed with the new CP rules in mind, so we can't draw any conclusions from their contents. I'm fairly sure the entire mode was dreamed up by the money men, not the designers, to try to sell the CP boxes.
Damage is going down compared to 9th. The general reduction in -1AP is good evidence of that. Comparing anything to 3rd seems bizarre, especially when you simultaneously use Intercessors as a yardstick, who didn't even exist until 8th. 3rd was over 20 years ago now. Penitent asks a good question about your assertion over BS. Do you understand that BS for Heavy weapons didn't get worse for Sisters, in practice?
Almost everything you've said is looking through the lens of 9th edition (or, for some reason, 3rd). 10th is going to be a big rests in many ways. Even just your comment about MSU being too strong not to utilise may not be correct now. In fact, Sisters seem to have incentives to take a mix of MSU and larger squads due to the Miracle Dice generation and Martyrdom rules.
Right, what do you think is the reasonable points costs for both those models?
I don't know. I have no way of knowing. Neither do you. That's the whole point. We've seen snippets of units, weapons and army rules without even 10% of the full picture so we can't draw any conclusions yet.
"Conversion" is a new weapon keyword that we haven't seen before.
Judgment tokens are now a more sensible buff.
Kinda weird to see Conversion as an USR, is there that many weapons that have that rule?
Neat to see more "out of phase" reactions, maybe by 11th GW will go full-on alternating :p
"Conversion" is a new weapon keyword that we haven't seen before.
Also, they sneaked in Critical Hits, confirming that 'Critical' works on things other than wounds
Notably, since it's a Critical Hit on a 4+, it's easier to trigger the extra d3 Sustained Hits.
Pretty sure they mentioned Critical Hits in one of the early reveals. This is a good example of how the Critical system can streamline the game. It'll take a little bit of getting used to as the various USRs are new, but it should make for a much easier to understand game in the long run.
"Conversion" is a new weapon keyword that we haven't seen before.
Also, they sneaked in Critical Hits, confirming that 'Critical' works on things other than wounds
Notably, since it's a Critical Hit on a 4+, it's easier to trigger the extra d3 Sustained Hits.
Pretty sure they mentioned Critical Hits in one of the early reveals. This is a good example of how the Critical system can streamline the game. It'll take a little bit of getting used to as the various USRs are new, but it should make for a much easier to understand game in the long run.
The weapon article already showed the Sustained Hits ability which keys of Critical Hits, but it's nice to have confirmation what critical hits are. Some people need that, if you followed the discussions about crit wounds
"Conversion" is a new weapon keyword that we haven't seen before.
Judgment tokens are now a more sensible buff.
Kinda weird to see Conversion as an USR, is there that many weapons that have that rule?
Neat to see more "out of phase" reactions, maybe by 11th GW will go full-on alternating :p
Conversion may still be a relatively rare rule - I notice that Conversion and One Shot are spelled out on the sheet while stuff like Heavy and Rapid Fire aren't - might suggest that the less common abilities will include the reminder text.
You really want to tell me that model is still worth 11 points and an Intercessor 18 points.
Yes, I am sure they’re going to make Sisters 3 attacks and 2 wounds for combat patrol and they won’t just be tweaking and tucking a few things. ?
Can you really tell me you know an intercessor is 18 and a sister 11? Can you really not use your imagination enough to consider extra rules for units outside of raw wounds/attacks?
Honestly you need to go calm down somewhere, it's ridiculous.
Kind of. They're going to feel really constrained if opponents regularly fight to maim, rather than wipe out your units.
Alternately, go for killing blows with trash units like grots or cultists, just to add insult to injury.
Or go for kills with units that already have 2 tokens. They can’t hate you more then they already do at that point.
That too, but those should be priority targets for the squats.
I also noticed some of the more... excessive... special rules went away, as did the odd weapon types. Pretty glad for that. Hope orks get shifted back to fewer special snowflake rules (dakka, for example has no reason to exist with the way rapid fire works now).
Toughness 5 is a big boost, wonder if any of the bigger infantry and bikes will get T6.
BS 4 negates the first judgement token and puts them firmly in the Tau/Guard category. Necron warriors went to BS4 but the Monolith stayed at BS3, so they are more likely to be a mixed BS3/4 faction. Another feather in the Sister's caps that they remained BS3
6" less range on quite a few guns.
Apparently losing:
Special snowflake advance rules.
Ignoring movement penalties rules.
Preventing wound re-rolls
Armour of contempt
Beam rules
The pre nerf points costs in 9th make a lot more sense for an army designed this way, it will be nice to see a few more squat squads on the table at 2k. Wait, am I supposed to go on a massive rant about how badly nerfed they are before we see the points? Just look at the combat patrol box, clearly they'll cost too much compared to Marines! My army may not have an easy answer to every possible opponent, reeeee!
You really want to tell me that model is still worth 11 points and an Intercessor 18 points.
Yes, I am sure they’re going to make Sisters 3 attacks and 2 wounds for combat patrol and they won’t just be tweaking and tucking a few things. ?
Can you really tell me you know an intercessor is 18 and a sister 11? Can you really not use your imagination enough to consider extra rules for units outside of raw wounds/attacks?
Honestly you need to go calm down somewhere, it's ridiculous.
Marines have their own army wide rules and strats. So you just have the base costs for the profile and then all that on top of it. Sisters aren’t the only ones with off balance sheet abilities.
I don’t think the AoF or Martyrdom rules are enough to justify making a Sister 4 points more expensive than they should be and not applying any increases to the Intercessor.
Also, I thought point was to represent unit abilities on the profile and not have them elsewhere?
Not only that but you’re all assuming they won’t day 1 FAQ it because everybody complains about struggling to kill tanks and so they bring back all the AP. Which I notice the Intercessor didn’t lose BTW despite that being a super powerful thing now that should come at a huge premium on base infantry.
Look if you want marines to Uber elite then you pay the points for it and get less models than armies. It’s very straight forward. 11/18 is GW trying to keep the armies in the same lane and just ignoring what each unit brings. Marines should be pushing into where Custodes are now.
Not only that but you’re all assuming they won’t day 1 FAQ it because everybody complains about struggling to kill tanks and so they bring back all the AP. Which I notice the Intercessor didn’t lose BTW despite that being a super powerful thing now that should come at a huge premium on base infantry.
wtf are you even talking about? day 1 FAQ'ing what? extra ap on everything in the game?
You really want to tell me that model is still worth 11 points and an Intercessor 18 points.
Yes, I am sure they’re going to make Sisters 3 attacks and 2 wounds for combat patrol and they won’t just be tweaking and tucking a few things. ?
Can you really tell me you know an intercessor is 18 and a sister 11? Can you really not use your imagination enough to consider extra rules for units outside of raw wounds/attacks?
Honestly you need to go calm down somewhere, it's ridiculous.
Marines have their own army wide rules and strats. So you just have the base costs for the profile and then all that on top of it. Sisters aren’t the only ones with off balance sheet abilities.
I don’t think the AoF or Martyrdom rules are enough to justify making a Sister 4 points more expensive than they should be and not applying any increases to the Intercessor.
Also, I thought point was to represent unit abilities on the profile and not have them elsewhere?
Not only that but you’re all assuming they won’t day 1 FAQ it because everybody complains about struggling to kill tanks and so they bring back all the AP. Which I notice the Intercessor didn’t lose BTW despite that being a super powerful thing now that should come at a huge premium on base infantry.
Look if you want marines to Uber elite then you pay the points for it and get less models than armies. It’s very straight forward. 11/18 is GW trying to keep the armies in the same lane and just ignoring what each unit brings. Marines should be pushing into where Custodes are now.
No one but you is convinced that 11 and 18 are the relevant point values. That's why people are telling you to knock it off, your argument is based on a fiction.
We haven't seen those numbers yet, and you can't base an argument on the entirely fictional idea that while things are changing, those are definitely staying the same.
Voss wrote: No one but you is convinced that 11 and 18 are the relevant point values. That's why people are telling you to knock it off, your argument is based on a fiction.
We haven't seen those numbers yet, and you can't base an argument on the entirely fictional idea that while things are changing, those are definitely staying the same.
The points ratio will likely be very close to what it is now. Anyone thinking you should get 3 Sisters for 1 Marine is really reaching.
Totalwar1402 wrote: Not only that but you’re all assuming they won’t day 1 FAQ it because everybody complains about struggling to kill tanks and so they bring back all the AP. Which I notice the Intercessor didn’t lose BTW despite that being a super powerful thing now that should come at a huge premium on base infantry.
They have lost the additional AP from Doctrines, though - and with the merged profile, there goes the -2AP for the Heavy variant (whose name escapes me right now).
Totalwar1402 wrote: Not only that but you’re all assuming they won’t day 1 FAQ it because everybody complains about struggling to kill tanks and so they bring back all the AP. Which I notice the Intercessor didn’t lose BTW despite that being a super powerful thing now that should come at a huge premium on base infantry.
They have lost the additional AP from Doctrines, though - and with the merged profile, there goes the -2AP for the Heavy variant (whose name escapes me right now).
And D2.
Stalker - 36" A1 S4 AP2 D2, Heavy
Auto - 24" A3 S4 AP0 D1, Assault
Bolt Rifle, 30" A1 S4 AP1 D1, RF ( but was effectively always on )
All condensed to :
24" A2 S4 AP1 D1, Heavy, Assault
Which is a decent profile for a unit that can't take any specials or heavies like other units in the game.
An option to buy special and heavy weapons. Which makes the unit more dangerous but at a cost of even more points. Which on an overcosted base unit isn’t ideal. Even if they said you got all the weapons for free that would be going for all the other armies in the game as well.
Also, if you just want to spam those weapons you have Dominions and Retributors to do that. It’s more about how cheap those guns are and if that weapon access is baked into the points that just incentivises you to take as few Sisters with bolters. Buy those retributor squads instead.
I think it will push people in to running minimal troops for the sticky objectives, and then going hard in to tanks or melee elite units depending what kind of a marine army they play. All boils down to point efficiency and how good marine tanks are going to be for different armies.
On the other hand, I have no idea how orks or GSC are going to end up as, with the core rules we have seen till now. Could go either way. Ton of swarms of infantry or a tank of vehicles.
Daedalus81 wrote: Which is a decent profile for a unit that can't take any specials or heavies like other units in the game.
Not really 'decent' as it's either bolt rifle that lost 6 inches of range or auto bolter that lost 1 attack (then there are chapters like RG or Raptors that liked 36 inch range and D2 and are now completely screwed). The ability to tailor the squad to your particular playstyle/chapter fluff was ace, now it's one-size-fits-none gak like old bolter, bolter, or bolter non-choice that made tactical squads into despised tax you tried to take as little as possible instead of fluffy backbone of the army as they didn't fit the playstyle of good 80% of the chapters in the game.
Yes, it's slightly bigger 'one-size-fits-none' than bolters and I hope it can be made to work, but I am not really optimistic here. Doubly so if inept writer sabotaging primaris last two editions slaps some absurd point premium on it for the hodge-podge of keywords it got now
Karol wrote: I think it will push people in to running minimal troops for the sticky objectives, and then going hard in to tanks or melee elite units depending what kind of a marine army they play. All boils down to point efficiency and how good marine tanks are going to be for different armies.
On the other hand, I have no idea how orks or GSC are going to end up as, with the core rules we have seen till now. Could go either way. Ton of swarms of infantry or a tank of vehicles.
Marines want max squads if a character is in. Otherwise whatever fits a role.
Nids want big squads given their good morale.
CSM want big squads if they're going to use pacts so they don't have additional MW hitting units.
Orks want big units for that weirdboy spell.
Necrons and Daemons want big units to survive to reanimate / heal.
Guard want big units to resurrect.
Sisters want big units to make use of their bonus, but may also want small units to pick up miracle dice.
Votann want small units so it's easier for an opponent to get a token.
Taking a step back, why are the sisters complaints in here, the relative profiles and supporting rules aren't wildly different from today to such a point they're unrecognisable. Surely this shouldn't be anything new? Why the intercessors hate, not seeing tac Marine grumbles, or complaint compared to hearthkyn
Dudeface wrote: Taking a step back, why are the sisters complaints in here, the relative profiles and supporting rules aren't wildly different from today to such a point they're unrecognisable. Surely this shouldn't be anything new? Why the intercessors hate, not seeing tac Marine grumbles, or complaint compared to hearthkyn
Which is the problem. The new edition should have looked to correct that instead of continuing putting an Intercessor and Sister of Battle in the same points bracket.
You could apply most of this to a tactical marine but we have the Intercessor profile and it’s the standard to which most other units in the game can be compared as the core troop choice of the most popular army and poster child of the setting.
Dudeface wrote: Taking a step back, why are the sisters complaints in here, the relative profiles and supporting rules aren't wildly different from today to such a point they're unrecognisable. Surely this shouldn't be anything new? Why the intercessors hate, not seeing tac Marine grumbles, or complaint compared to hearthkyn
Which is the problem. The new edition should have looked to correct that instead of continuing putting an Intercessor and Sister of Battle in the same points bracket.
You could apply most of this to a tactical marine but we have the Intercessor profile and it’s the standard to which most other units in the game can be compared as the core troop choice of the most popular army and poster child of the setting.
'Points bracket' is just something you made up, and then 11 v 18 pts is not the same 'bracket', it means you get 5 of the one on 3 of the other.
Dudeface wrote: Taking a step back, why are the sisters complaints in here, the relative profiles and supporting rules aren't wildly different from today to such a point they're unrecognisable. Surely this shouldn't be anything new? Why the intercessors hate, not seeing tac Marine grumbles, or complaint compared to hearthkyn
Which is the problem. The new edition should have looked to correct that instead of continuing putting an Intercessor and Sister of Battle in the same points bracket.
You could apply most of this to a tactical marine but we have the Intercessor profile and it’s the standard to which most other units in the game can be compared as the core troop choice of the most popular army and poster child of the setting.
'Points bracket' is just something you made up, and then 11 v 18 pts is not the same 'bracket', it means you get 5 of the one on 3 of the other.
It’s a term of phrase meant to convey an idea.
11 and 18 points is pretty comparable and once you factor in guns you’ll be on even numbers.
So those 3 models will have an extra wound, 3 extra attacks, str and t 4, hitting on 3 in CC and with a better gun. The only thing they have going is its five (weaker) bolters against three. Bolters that don’t have AP and shorter range.
If you think 3 Intercessors are the same as 5 sisters of Battle with bolters you’re not seeing the wood for the trees.
The guns should be the high cost item. Not the troops themselves.
Dudeface wrote: Taking a step back, why are the sisters complaints in here, the relative profiles and supporting rules aren't wildly different from today to such a point they're unrecognisable. Surely this shouldn't be anything new? Why the intercessors hate, not seeing tac Marine grumbles, or complaint compared to hearthkyn
If "aren't wildy different" continues for several editions, then it eventually adds up to be "wildly different".
So those 3 models will have an extra wound, 3 extra attacks, str and t 4, hitting on 3 in CC and with a better gun. The only thing they have going is its five (weaker) bolters against three. Bolters that don’t have AP and shorter range.
If you think 3 Intercessors are the same as 5 sisters of Battle with bolters you’re not seeing the wood for the trees.
The guns should be the high cost item. Not the troops themselves.
The 10th edition bolt rifles are the same range as Sister's bolters. Those 5 sisters put 10 shots to 6 from the marines at half range. Those marines can have their AP negated by cover and get no cover from the Sisters shooting them.
A rule where you have to be losing the game to get special rules doesn’t seem very good.
Losing one model in a unit of 20 in a Hallowed Martyr's detachment = an immediate +1 to hit for that unit on every attack against every unit for the rest of the game.
Losing one model in a unit of 20 in a Hallowed Martyr's detachment =/= losing the game.
MSU is too strong. It’s a way of exploiting the game. You pay same points for extra map control and effective damage protection by overkill. No downside to it at all for a unit you just want to secure objectives. Plus, it just does not suit the character of the Sisters army at all. So it’s not a trade off. People will carry on with their map control and now Faith dice.
The downside of MSU controlling objectives is that it takes fewer shots to end their control of said objectives.
There is no "Single characteristic force" that is most fluffy to Sisters. If a mission calls for MSU, it is in character to send MSU. If a mission calls for max troop blocks, they send massed troop blocks. The tool fits the job. I have the recent Marvel SoB comic. I think they send down five-ten sisters to do the job?
As for Faith, yes, a few lean 5 woman units to seek Martyrdom in order to get you a boost to the MD pool does make sense. But we've demonstrated to you that there is no advantage to having an MSU hold objective when it comes to the Defenders of the Faith MD bonus over giving the same job to a bigger unit.
Rerolls did go down. Youaren't being specific enough when you state your point.
Yes, in a game VS Marines with Bobby, 5 of our units over the course of the entire game will have lots of rerolls against them from Oath of moment. In 9th, there were ways to get rerolls against every unit.
It's more correct to say that morale changed for every faction in the game, and that we don't really know the full impact of that yet... Though I will be fair and say that having high dice be good for morale will make it harder for Sisters to use MD for morale, because there are too many other uses for high-rolling MD.
So yes... But also no? They were rapid fire before, so there were always circumstances where a Marine could get 2 shots... But yes, it has moved to a system where they'll be getting two shots more often than in the previous edition.
I think what you mean by this is that every infantry portable heavy weapon in the game, including those that are not weilded by marines, gets a +1 to hit when they stand still, however all of those weapons have had their BS adjusted so that the net effect is no functional change from one version of the game to the other for anyone.
Bolters can, being assault weapons, and non-assault weapons can during one turn of the game if the controlling player chooses to use their single use of Assault Doctrine.
You really want to tell me that model is still worth 11 points and an Intercessor 18 points.
You really want to tell me that you know points costs are going to be 11 and 18?
And if you do, can you link me to the proof?
I do agree that the 11- 18 ratios may be off... The issue is just that GW may have already already solved this problem- or at least narrowed the gap somewhat.
Yes, I am sure they’re going to make Sisters 3 attacks and 2 wounds for combat patrol and they won’t just be tweaking and tucking a few things. ?
They're unlikely to solve the problem that way- they'd be more likely to give Sisters units additional or alternate abilities that make the units more powerful.
Dudeface wrote: Taking a step back, why are the sisters complaints in here, the relative profiles and supporting rules aren't wildly different from today to such a point they're unrecognisable. Surely this shouldn't be anything new? Why the intercessors hate, not seeing tac Marine grumbles, or complaint compared to hearthkyn
If "aren't wildy different" continues for several editions, then it eventually adds up to be "wildly different".
Dudeface wrote: Taking a step back, why are the sisters complaints in here, the relative profiles and supporting rules aren't wildly different from today to such a point they're unrecognisable. Surely this shouldn't be anything new? Why the intercessors hate, not seeing tac Marine grumbles, or complaint compared to hearthkyn
If "aren't wildy different" continues for several editions, then it eventually adds up to be "wildly different".
That's lovely but I'm talking 9th to 10th.
To be honest, I don't know what total war's problem is.
The only really meaningful changes we've seen are that we can't guarantee 12 inch charges (which, admittedly, is so big that even every unit being able to use miracle dice every phase doesn't fully mitigate it) and that our guns are bad against vehicles.
We weren't really a shooting army anyway, so the guns thing doesn't really matter. We'll do just fine in melee like we did all 9th.
Sidebar: The Sister's reveal is very funny. Every other army is like 'well what will X type of gun do or Y cannon or Z pistol?' Sisters saw literally every gun in the entire army except the Castigator's in this preview.
Dudeface wrote: Taking a step back, why are the sisters complaints in here, the relative profiles and supporting rules aren't wildly different from today to such a point they're unrecognisable. Surely this shouldn't be anything new? Why the intercessors hate, not seeing tac Marine grumbles, or complaint compared to hearthkyn
If "aren't wildy different" continues for several editions, then it eventually adds up to be "wildly different".
That's lovely but I'm talking 9th to 10th.
That's the very definition of short-sighted, and the reason behind the saying "Those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it."
Insectum7 wrote: That's the very definition of short-sighted, and the reason behind the saying "Those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it."
I'm sure when you're working out a budget for something you want to buy in 3 months, you randomly decide to consider it's relevant cost increases over a 20 year period as well? It's really not relevant when doing a direct point to point comparison of 2 objects 3 months apart.
For MSU it’s not a disadvantage that you can in theory more easily shoot them off objectives.
1) If you take a block of twenty you can only hold one objective as opposed to four. Your opponent has to be able to make four seperate attacks on four seperate units. If you sink few hundred points to secure one objective you’re just conceding map control to him.
2) Objectives are usually around LOS blocking terrain. It’s a lot easier to hide these small units. Your opponent has to be in four different places as the area you can move and threaten is higher. A big ponderous unit of 20 models is a lot easier to deal with.
3) If instead of buying three lots 20 overpriced Battle sisters to secure three objectives you instead got 3 lots of 5 and spent the rest on killing units like retributors, Repentia and sacresancts; your opponent has to deal with them first on the board. So they won’t be able to send ten guardsman to bayonet charge 5 sisters.
4) You aren’t losing out. If there’s one objective you just park all four units on one objective. Same firepower and survivability.
5) Sportsmanship. Let’s say you’re playing Heresy and you bring a fluffy list of 4 lots of 20 marines. That’s a lot of points not going into guns and close combat units. Even in a friendly game that can swing it because a much cheaper two tax squads in rhinos can get you enough map control. Whilst your opponent has a fun game butchering your overmatched troops.
Like I kind of went off Age of Sigmar when I got advised after a game to split my Liberator squads into different objective tokens of 5 instead of a full unit. I wouldn’t be taking the unit or the army if I just wanted to park a dinky unit at the back and pray I don’t get shot.
It should be I take an objective and then we fight over that objective. Not be put in the situation where you lose the game because you took full units instead of MSU tokens so you can’t contest the four objectives.
Looking at the Votann preview, I'm surprised to see Conversion going off on an unmodified roll of a 4+, meaning that it doesn't interact with the +1 to hit from the Judgement tokens.
“Oathbands are built around a corps of dependable Hearthkyn Warriors – rough and ready fighters clad in thick, void-sealed armour to bolster their natural hardiness. “
Ah so toughness 5 for your armour on dwarves? Pretty sure they ain’t Space Marines so all you lot saying “oh marines get wounds and toughness coz they’re marines. Geneseed! It’s not because of the armour.”
Yeah….
Which is another baseline unit that got its durability increased and on the grounds of equipment. So I don’t think this Sisters should have a guard stat line comes from but it’s getting pretty sus now.
Totalwar1402 wrote: “Oathbands are built around a corps of dependable Hearthkyn Warriors – rough and ready fighters clad in thick, void-sealed armour to bolster their natural hardiness. “
Ah so toughness 5 for your armour on dwarves? Pretty sure they ain’t Space Marines so all you lot saying “oh marines get wounds and toughness coz they’re marines. Geneseed! It’s not because of the armour.”
Yeah….
Which is another baseline unit that got its durability increased and on the grounds of equipment. So I don’t think this Sisters should have a guard stat line comes from but it’s getting pretty sus now.
T5 is probably the replacement for void armour (cancel one point of AP on incoming fire, no re-rolls for wound and damage rolls) which would be very OP under 10th conditions. I don't suppose all Votann will have T5 standard.
Totalwar1402 wrote: “Oathbands are built around a corps of dependable Hearthkyn Warriors – rough and ready fighters clad in thick, void-sealed armour to bolster their natural hardiness. “
Ah so toughness 5 for your armour on dwarves? Pretty sure they ain’t Space Marines so all you lot saying “oh marines get wounds and toughness coz they’re marines. Geneseed! It’s not because of the armour.”
Yeah….
Which is another baseline unit that got its durability increased and on the grounds of equipment. So I don’t think this Sisters should have a guard stat line comes from but it’s getting pretty sus now.
T5 is probably the replacement for void armour (cancel one point of AP on incoming fire, no re-rolls for wound and damage rolls) which would be very OP under 10th conditions. I don't suppose all Votann will have T5 standard.
Insectum7 wrote: That's the very definition of short-sighted, and the reason behind the saying "Those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it."
I'm sure when you're working out a budget for something you want to buy in 3 months, you randomly decide to consider it's relevant cost increases over a 20 year period as well? It's really not relevant when doing a direct point to point comparison of 2 objects 3 months apart.
Focussing on the short term while ignoring the long term always works out well. Sure.
For MSU it’s not a disadvantage that you can in theory more easily shoot them off objectives.
1) If you take a block of twenty you can only hold one objective as opposed to four. Your opponent has to be able to make four seperate attacks on four seperate units. If you sink few hundred points to secure one objective you’re just conceding map control to him.
2) Objectives are usually around LOS blocking terrain. It’s a lot easier to hide these small units. Your opponent has to be in four different places as the area you can move and threaten is higher. A big ponderous unit of 20 models is a lot easier to deal with.
3) If instead of buying three lots 20 overpriced Battle sisters to secure three objectives you instead got 3 lots of 5 and spent the rest on killing units like retributors, Repentia and sacresancts; your opponent has to deal with them first on the board. So they won’t be able to send ten guardsman to bayonet charge 5 sisters.
4) You aren’t losing out. If there’s one objective you just park all four units on one objective. Same firepower and survivability.
5) Sportsmanship. Let’s say you’re playing Heresy and you bring a fluffy list of 4 lots of 20 marines. That’s a lot of points not going into guns and close combat units. Even in a friendly game that can swing it because a much cheaper two tax squads in rhinos can get you enough map control. Whilst your opponent has a fun game butchering your overmatched troops.
Like I kind of went off Age of Sigmar when I got advised after a game to split my Liberator squads into different objective tokens of 5 instead of a full unit. I wouldn’t be taking the unit or the army if I just wanted to park a dinky unit at the back and pray I don’t get shot.
It should be I take an objective and then we fight over that objective. Not be put in the situation where you lose the game because you took full units instead of MSU tokens so you can’t contest the four objectives.
This is a well argued post.
For me, I usually use a mix of unit sizes- I've never been a huge fan of MSU, especially when the models are somewhat fragile. But I also tend to play mostly 25PL games, so MSU are usually practical. Growing units from 5-20 over the course of a Crusade will be in the cards for some units and not others, and it all depends on the story within the larger campaign.
My SoB Mission has been cut off from the Imperium for 4 millennia, so they got used to training recruits from a single system at the Progenium facilities that were available. The lost contact with the convents Prioris and Sanctorum have left these sisters with a fierce streak of independence, and when contact with the Imperium has been re-established, their may be conflicts with the main convent. There's a potential for a huge influx of new units, but the isolationists need those units to earn trust before they accept outsiders en masse.
So for me, it isn't as simple as "Choose to have a unit of 5 vs a unit of 20 because winning" - in the first games of the Crusade, I can only afford MSU, and those squads grow when recruits at the progenium are ready to graduate.
Mid campaign, a whole other army of Sisters shows up, and the existing army begins to vet those new units one at a time, accepting them as sisters only once they've demonstrated prowess, character, and a commitment to manifesting the will of the Emperor.
Insectum7 wrote: That's the very definition of short-sighted, and the reason behind the saying "Those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it."
I'm sure when you're working out a budget for something you want to buy in 3 months, you randomly decide to consider it's relevant cost increases over a 20 year period as well? It's really not relevant when doing a direct point to point comparison of 2 objects 3 months apart.
Focussing on the short term while ignoring the long term always works out well. Sure.
That does depend on the army though. An eldar player wants his faction and the units he likes to be fun to play now, because he knows that as soon as his codex for the new edition drops, more fun is garenteed. Someone who plays a faction with more ups and downs, lets say orks, can decide that because greenwave is v.bad this edition they will take the 3 years time, as an option to repaint 200+ new orks and not be involved that much with the gaming. Because the ork player knows that his books are sometimes good, sometimes bad and most important not always fun to play the way he wants.
Insectum7 wrote: That's the very definition of short-sighted, and the reason behind the saying "Those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it."
I'm sure when you're working out a budget for something you want to buy in 3 months, you randomly decide to consider it's relevant cost increases over a 20 year period as well? It's really not relevant when doing a direct point to point comparison of 2 objects 3 months apart.
Focussing on the short term while ignoring the long term always works out well. Sure.
What exactly is your point here? I'm merely stating the profiles of the units being complained about as a part of the transition from 9th to 10th are awfully close to how they are now, what the feth does that have to do with searching through the annals of history or considering the ramifications for a century from now? I'm purely addressing their state from 9th, to 10th, because the comparison being made is about the unit entries, from its, to 10th. There is no deep soul searching required for the profile of a sister back in 2nd Ed, nor concerns for 30 wound giga Chad intersupers in 27th edition.
Aash wrote: Looking at the Votann preview, I'm surprised to see Conversion going off on an unmodified roll of a 4+, meaning that it doesn't interact with the +1 to hit from the Judgement tokens.
Seems like a missed opportunity for synergy.
I'm exceedingly glad they didn't. 8th was full of that stuff and it was brutal.
There ate better ways to make the game interesting.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Unit1126PLL wrote: "things are bad now, and 10th doesn't fix it" is not countered by "tenth isn't changing much". In fact, it is supported.
For me 9th is just crazy messy - not bad.
10th is changing quite a bit and I'm not sure where that perspective is coming from?
Is it this sense that sisters should suddenly be more durable?
Hmm. Between the sisters preview and the squats preview, it seems like strats that let you shoot back at the enemy might be somewhat common this edition. I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing, but it does seem like a slightly odd choice.
People didn't care much for tau getting a free shooting phase or my ynnari getting to shoot on my opponent's turn. But maybe it will work out given the CP cost, the trigger, and the units available to the factions that have it. The worst thing to shoot back at you on your own turn for sisters is what? Paragon warsuits? Assuming you're not like, shooting a squishy infantry squad at a big old blob of sisters anyway. Not sure how scary some out of turn squat shooting would be. I've only played a single game against them.
Unit1126PLL wrote: "things are bad now, and 10th doesn't fix it" is not countered by "tenth isn't changing much". In fact, it is supported.
It is rather hard to say 10th doesn't fix things with how little rules we know about 10th. It doesn't matter that a Bolter-armed Battle Sister looks like 40% of a Bolt Rifle Intercessor. We don't have the points value of an Bolter-armed Battle Sister, a fulled upgraded Battle Sister Squad, nor an Intercessor. So we really don't know how to compare them in a meaningful way.
You can compare the changes to the two squads based on the preview.
We basically see the Battle Sister stat line hasn't changed except for a bit worst leadership. Meltaguns/Multi-Meltas are a bit worst against vehicles/Monster. We have less layers of rules, but Battle Sisters are now a source of generating Miracle Dice.
Intercessor have pretty much the same stat line as the 8.5/9th Marine, now with less Leadership and no ATSKNF. The new fangled Bolt Rifle, while incorporating all the prior versions of the Bolt Rifle and Bolter Discipline into a versatile package, is strictly worst than any one of it's predecessors at their specific jobs (less range than any but the Auto Bolt Rifle, less attacks than the Auto Bolt Rifle, less AP and damage than the Stalker Bolt Rifle). We don't know what nifty Ability the unit gets, but it will need to be awesome to makeup for the loss of AP enhancing Doctrines, not to mention super-doctrines.
Call me biased, but I think Intercessors have actually lost more than Battle Sisters in the transition to 10th, as far as we know.
I want to take this time and this space to preemptively complain about drukhari.
I am now almost certain we are getting screwed again. Tau seem even better than before and power from pain is getting nerfed I'm pretty sure
Archons won't be able to join grotesques which sucks if it happens. Everyone else now has pseudo open topped transports so ours are worse by comparison. Plus weapons went up in strength making our toughness 3 even less tough. And don't get me started on poison. And if that's not enough we won't even get a dex until 2025. I'm so sick of 10th edition already.
If you're going to complain about something, pick a topic that's worth being annoyed about:
1. One-Size-Fits-All combi-weapon profiles. 2. "And They Shall Know Oaths of Moment" being the new defining trait of all Marines, rather than the things that have traditionally defined them. 3. Shadow in the Warp, good or bad, being really boring. 4. The terrain rules are simplistic and silly.
tneva82 wrote: You keep referring for stuff they get in future and current point costs. That's just fallacity. You either refer current rules and points or future rules and points.
Anything else and you admit for being dishonest arqument and just interested in causing trouble.
Cute.
I’ve seen enough to know where the winds going. Damage is still absurdly high. Sisters profile got worse. Marines got better. Saying that combat patrols are balanced when they have same models as marines. Rules that encourage taking minimum size squads which is gamey and silly.
Damage may or may not be absurdly high. Marines did not get better. And the Sisters profile looks the same. Did they lose a point of LD?
Everything they put out just confirms that they’re doubling down on this stupid idea that the Sisters of Battle Intercessors should be in same bracket because “ohhh 3 plus armour” and that giving them a Centurion from Heresy’s profile is just a little added extra.
It’s stupid and it just means people will carry on taking weird sisters lists that have two lots of five sisters because they’re overcosted.
So no, I am going to list precedents like points cost. A Sister of Battle with a bolt gun should be a third the points cost of an Intercessor.
dominuschao wrote: I want to take this time and this space to preemptively complain about drukhari.
I am now almost certain we are getting screwed again. Tau seem even better than before and power from pain is getting nerfed I'm pretty sure
Archons won't be able to join grotesques which sucks if it happens. Everyone else now has pseudo open topped transports so ours are worse by comparison. Plus weapons went up in strength making our toughness 3 even less tough. And don't get me started on poison. And if that's not enough we won't even get a dex until 2025. I'm so sick of 10th edition already.
I'm a little unimpressed with Acts of Faith mostly in the production of miracle dice. Comparing it to some of the other similar abilities its just harder to apply. It's got both the "Control Objectives to trigger full value" and "Doesn't automatically affect everyone" issue. I mean Daemons have to control objectives for more value, but it affects everyone. Marines don't have to control objectives but 3 out of 5ish turns means it doesn't affect everyone. Sisters appear to have been hit with both. Have to wait and see, but it doesn't look good.
Getting ~50 MD per game looks unimpressive to you ? Its way better than a reroll because you already know what you will get.
Not sure where you're getting 50. One per turn, one per Sister Squad(s) on an objective on your turn - assuming a 50/50 3 of 6 objectives for five turns (even being on three turn 1 Command Phase is unlikely) is 15 plus 10 for 25. Beyond that you're either in a laugher or you're losing squads which means those lost squads aren't getting to use your dice. There's certainly more to see, but their mechanic looks more painful than Doctrines, Dark Pacts, etc.
Did you read the preview ? You get 1 each players turn, thats 10. Then you get 1 for each objective marker you hold with battle sisters. Lets say thats about 13 (your home marker and two in no mans land from turn 2 onwards). Then you get 1 for each friendly unit killed by the enemy. Thats 5-10 more. Whenever a simulacrum unit kills an enemy unit, you get 1. There are 5 sisters units currently which have the simulacrum ability. Lets say those kill 5-10 enemy units, thats 5-10 more. Add those up and you get to 33-43 dice. Thats just from the preview, im pretty sure there will be more ways to gain miracle dice. Cherubs will let you get rid of 1s and 2s you roll, because you immediately get one more dice.
That doesn't get you to 50, you're assuming you get to control both midfields and a bunch if my stuff dies destroying your stuff giving me dice I can't use because... my stuff was destroyed while destroying your stuff.
I just see most of these abilities having one drawback or the other - Chaos gets to use the ability which blows their stuff up, Sisters have to blow their stuff up to use the ability. Sure if Sisters get up and rolling they churn through the dice, but on a slow start or evenly matched game with miracle dice keep up with Doctrines or Pacts?
The weapon article already showed the Sustained Hits ability which keys of Critical Hits, but it's nice to have confirmation what critical hits are. Some people need that, if you followed the discussions about crit wounds
And some people just have to be the donkey-cave. If you had followed that discussion you would have found out we know no more about about Critical Hits than we do Critical Wounds. We don't know what else they're going to interact with or if this is the extant of interactions.
In before "but was is a Critical Hit" philosophical external monologue.
So the total sum value of your post is to violate rule number one, not provide anything constructive, and congratulate yourself for being the first to do so, yet failing to actually be first? Have you tried looking up the definition of "philosophical"? Have you tried intellectual honesty? Have you tried wondering about anything beyond what you've been spoonfed?
And now to be fair - We have a pretty good guess. Poison will more than likely be some sort of Anti-Biological - Almost Assuredly Anti-Infantry (though how they're going to say all of these, but not Necron Robot Warriors I don't know) potentially anti-Swarm/Monster/Calvary/etc. but potentially not. They may decide that Monsters are too big to be susceptible to the same poisons that kill a man sized person, and swarms are too hard to hit with the little needle dart. (as Justification for balance reasons to make Monsters not poof to a poison troop unit) Poison could be it's own USR that like the Marines USR of 9th, was just See Also: a bunch of other USR's: in this case Anti-X with a bunch of X's.
That doesn't get you to 50, you're assuming you get to control both midfields and a bunch if my stuff dies destroying your stuff giving me dice I can't use because... my stuff was destroyed while destroying your stuff.
I just see most of these abilities having one drawback or the other - Chaos gets to use the ability which blows their stuff up, Sisters have to blow their stuff up to use the ability. Sure if Sisters get up and rolling they churn through the dice, but on a slow start or evenly matched game with miracle dice keep up with Doctrines or Pacts?
No, it doesnt get me to 50, because its just a preview. What you saw is a tiny bit from the army rules, and 30 is not unlikely from this sneak peak. Pacts are weak because you must roll 6s, only every 6th dice roll does that. Sisters already know what they will get, they can even plan for the next turns with already rolled dice.
dominuschao wrote:I want to take this time and this space to preemptively complain about drukhari.
I am now almost certain we are getting screwed again. Tau seem even better than before and power from pain is getting nerfed I'm pretty sure
Archons won't be able to join grotesques which sucks if it happens. Everyone else now has pseudo open topped transports so ours are worse by comparison. Plus weapons went up in strength making our toughness 3 even less tough. And don't get me started on poison. And if that's not enough we won't even get a dex until 2025. I'm so sick of 10th edition already.
H.B.M.C. wrote:We don't know what poison even does yet.
If you're going to complain about something, pick a topic that's worth being annoyed about:
1. One-Size-Fits-All combi-weapon profiles.
2. "And They Shall Know Oaths of Moment" being the new defining trait of all Marines, rather than the things that have traditionally defined them.
3. Shadow in the Warp, good or bad, being really boring.
4. The terrain rules are simplistic and silly.
What the hell do you think? Especially when we've had a few posters saying how ruined Sisters are for pages now* and people already saying that Dark Eldar would suck.
*Must say it's been such a long time since we've had Sisters players "Oh woe is me"-ing. Used to be such a staple of 40k players online...
Breton wrote: Pardon me while I laugh in Schadenfreude.
Given what's been going on, it might be inadvisable to go after those that have not joined in with everyone else against you in this thread.
That doesn't get you to 50, you're assuming you get to control both midfields and a bunch if my stuff dies destroying your stuff giving me dice I can't use because... my stuff was destroyed while destroying your stuff.
I just see most of these abilities having one drawback or the other - Chaos gets to use the ability which blows their stuff up, Sisters have to blow their stuff up to use the ability. Sure if Sisters get up and rolling they churn through the dice, but on a slow start or evenly matched game with miracle dice keep up with Doctrines or Pacts?
No, it doesnt get me to 50, because its just a preview. What you saw is a tiny bit from the army rules, and 30 is not unlikely from this sneak peak. Pacts are weak because you must roll 6s, only every 6th dice roll does that. Sisters already know what they will get, they can even plan for the next turns with already rolled dice.
Pacts are weak because only every 6th dice will roll one, but Sisters have miracle dice that... still only roll a 6 on every 6th dice? And Pacts don't require a 6? You say go, you get the ability, no roll required. Afterwards you roll your LD, so a 6 wouldn't suck. 7-8 units putting out 125-150ish shots are going to roll some 6's. Plus some of them are likely going to need less than a 6 for a Critical Hit.
I'm just going to guess (it could go either way, but traditionally they tend to go with No on FAQ's like this) Obliterators with Fleshmetal Guns on Warphail don't get Sustained Fire 1+1=2 so they'll instead be pretty much forced to chose Sustained Hits 1 and Lethal Hits 1 making them a prime target for any way(s) you can up their Critical Hit chances - bespoke, strat, etc. - even without it, they roll D6+3, 6.5 dice per Oblit, giving them 2 misses, 4 hits, and another hit that already wounded (potentially 3 hits and two wounds, because in the past when a Freebie Hit is generated, it's generated with the same "success number" as the hit that generated it" plus a half of something that doesn't really matter anymore. Aside from what used to be template weapons - there's very little in the army that can't/won't benefit from the rule on any/every turn. The other difference between Pacts/Doctrines/etc and Miracle Dice is that Miracle Dice can't really be front-loaded. They may be toning down lethality, but alpha strike is still alpha.
Pacts are weak because only every 6th dice will roll one, but Sisters have miracle dice that... still only roll a 6 on every 6th dice? And Pacts don't require a 6? You say go, you get the ability, no roll required. Afterwards you roll your LD, so a 6 wouldn't suck. 7-8 units putting out 125-150ish shots are going to roll some 6's. Plus some of them are likely going to need less than a 6 for a Critical Hit.
Yes, pacts are weak. You could end up rolling no 6s, and still suffer 3MW. Sisters get miracle dice for free, just for being sisters.
Pacts are weak because only every 6th dice will roll one, but Sisters have miracle dice that... still only roll a 6 on every 6th dice? And Pacts don't require a 6? You say go, you get the ability, no roll required. Afterwards you roll your LD, so a 6 wouldn't suck. 7-8 units putting out 125-150ish shots are going to roll some 6's. Plus some of them are likely going to need less than a 6 for a Critical Hit.
Yes, pacts are weak. You could end up rolling no 6s, and still suffer 3MW. Sisters get miracle dice for free, just for being sisters.
I'm not sure starting statistical then going max goalpost is the best way to go. Especially when its even easier to suggest Sisters won't get a 6 on their miracle dice because they get far fewer than 100-150 a turn.
I mean sure, there's a lot we don't know yet - and I'm just making an educated guess at some issues Miracle Dice will have compared to the other so far leaked counterparts and contemporaries. And if you want to make an argument in favor of the dice I'm all for it, but could you do better than your 150 dice won't come up 6 because I already called dibs on all sixes for my Miracle Dice? Or that it doesn't matter how slow Miracle Dice start because by the end of the game you'll have 50 with nothing to use them on because Miracle Dice can't be front loaded like most of these other abilities? Something that actually talks to the points I brought up without ridiculous levels of What-if?
So the total sum value of your post is to violate rule number one, not provide anything constructive, and congratulate yourself for being the first to do so, yet failing to actually be first? Have you tried looking up the definition of "philosophical"? Have you tried intellectual honesty? Have you tried wondering about anything beyond what you've been spoonfed?
Have you?
Philosopgical: relating or devoted to the study of the fundamental nature of knowledge, reality, and existence.
Kinda sounds to me like you've been considering the fundamental knowledge of the written words and applications in 40k, you derive a higher meaning and intent behind the simple language.
That aside, onto intellectual honesty:
Facts are presented in an unbiased manner, and not twisted to give misleading impressions or to support one view over another; References, or earlier work, are acknowledged where possible, and plagiarism is avoided.
As you noted immediately and criticised, I did not present any facts or information, so it's not a valid statement. You could argue I plagiarised your stance I guess?
Regards breaching rule 1 over a light hearted comment, welcome to the club now.
And for the spoon feeding, my grasp of the English language and reading comprehension has come from the public education system, the same system where you're to, a large degree, taught to trust those with more knowledge than yourself to learn from. So either you're insinuating that we shouldn't listen to GW as they do not know more about 10th than us, or you've unironically spouted a load of Internet argument buzzwords at me you've been spoonfed.
To that end, as we're all about self learning, anyone got thoughts on the leaked core stratagems?
So the total sum value of your post is to violate rule number one, not provide anything constructive, and congratulate yourself for being the first to do so, yet failing to actually be first? Have you tried looking up the definition of "philosophical"? Have you tried intellectual honesty? Have you tried wondering about anything beyond what you've been spoonfed?
Have you?
Why yes, I wondered what else Critical Wounds might do.
Philosopgical: relating or devoted to the study of the fundamental nature of knowledge, reality, and existence.
Kinda sounds to me like you've been considering the fundamental knowledge of the written words and applications in 40k, you derive a higher meaning and intent behind the simple language.
I'm not sure I'd call rules that haven't been teased yet in a toy soldier game with designed obsolescence as fundamental of anything. Do you think one of the unreleased rules is the meaning of life?
That aside, onto intellectual honesty:
Facts are presented in an unbiased manner, and not twisted to give misleading impressions or to support one view over another; References, or earlier work, are acknowledged where possible, and plagiarism is avoided.
As you noted immediately and criticised, I did not present any facts or information, so it's not a valid statement. You could argue I plagiarised your stance I guess?
Regards breaching rule 1 over a light hearted comment, welcome to the club now.
And for the spoon feeding, my grasp of the English language and reading comprehension has come from the public education system, the same system where you're to, a large degree, taught to trust those with more knowledge than yourself to learn from. So either you're insinuating that we shouldn't listen to GW as they do not know more about 10th than us, or you've unironically spouted a load of Internet argument buzzwords at me you've been spoonfed.
No I'm flat out explaining that what GW pre-releases is not the be-all end-all of what 40K will be - and flat out declaring there is nothing more to be seen with USR X because GW didn't release it is silly. Especially when the released Chaos Space Marine Boltguns without Rapid Fire while Sisters Boltguns do get to Rapid Fire. Now do you think GW knows more about Chaos Boltguns than we do, or do you think it was maybe an oversight and there's more to Chaos Boltguns than GW has told us?
To that end, as we're all about self learning, anyone got thoughts on the leaked core stratagems?
Breton wrote: No I'm flat out explaining that what GW pre-releases is not the be-all end-all of what 40K will be - and flat out declaring there is nothing more to be seen with USR X because GW didn't release it is silly. Especially when the released Chaos Space Marine Boltguns without Rapid Fire while Sisters Boltguns do get to Rapid Fire. Now do you think GW knows more about Chaos Boltguns than we do, or do you think it was maybe an oversight and there's more to Chaos Boltguns than GW has told us?
I have no reason to doubt that chaos boltguns are as advertised at this stage. It's easy to see that they have potentially taken bolter discipline into account and changed the base profile.
I am wondering how ‘glass-cannon’ units/armies are going to work in Xth.
Reduced lethality along with perhaps more reactive shooting might make it tricky.
I do wonder how Drukhari will be balanced. For example I found Poison Weapons better than the original Splinter Rifles. The balance to wounding everything* on a set value is that you wound everything on a set value.
And we already have heavy infantry with Assault Ramps and a chance to bundle back into their transport when charged.
H.B.M.C. wrote: Yeah. I'd've thought that the fact that Marine/Chaos Marine Bolters both got that, and others didn't, kinda made it obvious what they were going for.
I thought so but welcome to the spoonfed club. There's also chance it relates to their enahcne base strength to cope with recoil or better aim etc.
I believe that bolters so far are the weapon they managed to represent better.
Did you use those things in Darktide? They have a huge recoil, there is no way you can go full auto with them at long range and still hope to hit something.
It is only when you have that Ogryn in front of you that you empty the clip.
A marine probably has no issue of the sort, so he keeps his aim steady while in full auto and can use it effectively at long range. Even more effectively if he doesn't move.
I'm not sure starting statistical then going max goalpost is the best way to go. Especially when its even easier to suggest Sisters won't get a 6 on their miracle dice because they get far fewer than 100-150 a turn.
Lets assume 36 miracle dice for an entire game. Those will get you six 1s, six 2s, six 3s, six 4s, six 5s, six 6s. 24 dice with 3+. Those 24 dice i can count on, they are already rolled. Thats ten times better than hoping to roll 6s, and not failing LD tests to get MWs.
Your lets say 120 shots will give you 20 6s on average. what will those 6s do ? Its either an automatic wound or an extra hit. Sisters dice can be used for a lot more that just hitting and wounding.
H.B.M.C. wrote: Yeah. I'd've thought that the fact that Marine/Chaos Marine Bolters both got that, and others didn't, kinda made it obvious what they were going for.
Both got what? Chaos Marine boltguns didn't get anything according to the data sheet, not Rapid Fire, and not Heavy+Assault - marine bolt rifles have been leaked, but AFAIK Loyalist Marine Boltguns have not. Meanwhile the Sisters datasheet shows their Boltgun has Rapid Fire 1 - the Votann have another differently named Bolter that doesn't have anything either but I don't know enough about Votann to know what, if anything, that means. The Lasgun "still" has Rapid Fire 1.
Now even before we get to the game balance issues of a 2W roughly 20 point model getting the same or fewer shots than a 1w 10ish point model - Human Nature being what it is - I have a feeling Chaos Marine players are going to howl if their 10,000 year old Space Marines are worse than 20 year old nuns with guns. Once you factor points per blob at 24" ~100 points of CSM get 10 shots (5*2) while 100ish points of Sisters is going to pump out 10 (10*1) - while at 12 inches the CSM will still get 10. and the Sisters will get 20(10*1+1*10). But maybe they're also pushing CSM into the BP/CS default. I still forsee some feedback on this one.
Especially since, as you brought up, we've seen the Bolt Rifle and it has Assault and Heavy, while the CSM Boltgun has neither so CSM are going to get neither the close range bonus attacks we're used to seeing (and that traditionally offset the Assault rule) or the ability to run and gun we're seeing from Loyalist Bolt Rifles.
Maybe that's what they meant to do. Maybe it's (at least one of the leaks) an old datasheet/blurb/whatever that wasn't fully edited and updated (Remember Heavy Intercessors and 6 differently named Heavy Something guns that didn't match each other?). I don't know. But human nature being what it is not giving CSM either of those two specials is unlikely to sit or balance well.
I would hazard a guess that the tactical boltgun will be:
24" A2 S4 ap0 D1
The marine guns are all technically rapid fire 1 but due to bolter discipline and transhuman physiology they can fire at full range, so they've just given them A2.
The autoch is a more advanced bolter and uses stabilisers and targeters giving it more shots.
The sisters bolter is just what a non marine carrying a bolter looks like.
Hopefully this will be enough bolters for the game and we can look at other stuff.
What do you reckon the chances that ad mech go down to bs4+ are? At least for troops?
I reckon it's a pretty good chance that non elite troops will be bs4+ or worse across the board.
I wouldn't be surprised if they made guardians 4+, or had defenders bs3+ /ws4+ and storm the reverse.
H.B.M.C. wrote: Yeah. I'd've thought that the fact that Marine/Chaos Marine Bolters both got that, and others didn't, kinda made it obvious what they were going for.
Both got what? Chaos Marine boltguns didn't get anything according to the data sheet, not Rapid Fire, and not Heavy+Assault - marine bolt rifles have been leaked, but AFAIK Loyalist Marine Boltguns have not. Meanwhile the Sisters datasheet shows their Boltgun has Rapid Fire 1 - the Votann have another differently named Bolter that doesn't have anything either but I don't know enough about Votann to know what, if anything, that means. The Lasgun "still" has Rapid Fire 1.
Now even before we get to the game balance issues of a 2W roughly 20 point model getting the same or fewer shots than a 1w 10ish point model - Human Nature being what it is - I have a feeling Chaos Marine players are going to howl if their 10,000 year old Space Marines are worse than 20 year old nuns with guns. Once you factor points per blob at 24" ~100 points of CSM get 10 shots (5*2) while 100ish points of Sisters is going to pump out 10 (10*1) - while at 12 inches the CSM will still get 10. and the Sisters will get 20(10*1+1*10). But maybe they're also pushing CSM into the BP/CS default. I still forsee some feedback on this one.
Especially since, as you brought up, we've seen the Bolt Rifle and it has Assault and Heavy, while the CSM Boltgun has neither so CSM are going to get neither the close range bonus attacks we're used to seeing (and that traditionally offset the Assault rule) or the ability to run and gun we're seeing from Loyalist Bolt Rifles.
Maybe that's what they meant to do. Maybe it's (at least one of the leaks) an old datasheet/blurb/whatever that wasn't fully edited and updated (Remember Heavy Intercessors and 6 differently named Heavy Something guns that didn't match each other?). I don't know. But human nature being what it is not giving CSM either of those two specials is unlikely to sit or balance well.
The bolt rifle was analogous to the bolter in that it was a bolter+1, so if the bolt rifle has ceased being rapid fire as well it serves to stand that a tac marine bolter is also 2 shots the same as the chaos one, as one again, analogous entries. They should not get the smoragsbord of USR that a bolt rifle get however as that is clearly explained as an amalgamation of the variants.
Further point of clarity, they're not leaks, if GW publishes them as public info on their site, it's a reveal by intent.
I'm not sure starting statistical then going max goalpost is the best way to go. Especially when its even easier to suggest Sisters won't get a 6 on their miracle dice because they get far fewer than 100-150 a turn.
Lets assume 36 miracle dice for an entire game. Those will get you six 1s, six 2s, six 3s, six 4s, six 5s, six 6s. 24 dice with 3+. Those 24 dice i can count on, they are already rolled. Thats ten times better than hoping to roll 6s, and not failing LD tests to get MWs.
Your lets say 120 shots will give you 20 6s on average. what will those 6s do ? Its either an automatic wound or an extra hit. Sisters dice can be used for a lot more that just hitting and wounding.
Again, you're not talking to the points I'm bringing up, and still trying to roll your averages while tooling up 1's for the Chaos player.
Lets assume 36 miracle dice for an entire game. You have the fewest dice when you have the most units. What do you have on your first turn? 1? 2 if you go second, and another 2 if you have two objectives in your backfield with the right unit on it? So four total? How many units do you have? 18 if the CSM have 9?
Now it's turn/round 5, half your stuff is dead giving you 18 Miracle Dice. How many units do you have to use them on? Well, we don't know because we don't know how lethal the game is. Lets assume each side in a balanced game (and assume this is a balanced game) loses half. 9 left. for your 18 miracle dice.
Now lets say you're playing Chaos - its turn one. You have approximately 50-60 Legionary bodies putting out 100-150 shots. Probably closer to 150-200 if you've got a lot of vehicles, Oblits or what-have-you, but lets do 120 shots for easy math. That's 20 6's. That's the floor. We have no idea how many if any mechanics CSM will have for lowering the floor of Critical Hits. After that you've got lets say 60 bodies, 9 units. 3x10 and 6x5 - chances are some of those 5's are going to be 1's or 10's but its too early to know how many which way - of 9 units roughly 25% will fail a first umodified test for a 6+- but then you have rerolls, and bonuses (Abby, Icons etc). So you end up with an average of less than 1 unit taking an average 2 mortal wounds for 20+ Critical Hits and +1CP for Abby from Dark Destiny. Now Round 5, you've got 25-30 models, and 4-5 units. 60 shots is 10 Criticals, Even less of one unit taking 2 Mortals, and the CP for Abby.
Now the weakness of Pact is that you can't control where the 6's land (Not that 120 shots might get 0 6's). And there is something to be said for knowing just how far your unit will advance if you so choose to do so. But not getting to frontload the ability when you have the most bang for your buck may be a serious drawback, as is needing to use up a dice for each unit, as opposed to every unit that does an act uses this 1 dice for this turn and/or you start with X Dice and lose one for each of these scenarios (generally think opposite of when you would gain one except for squad wipe out keep that one as a lose one as the Emperor's Light fades on the battlefield- but as long as one Sister from that squad lives on, you keep that dice because she's a living miracle)
Lets do Doctrines. I've got 50-60 models in 9ish units again and all nine get to advance and shoot, or advance and charge, or - because the secret ingredient in that brownie was especially active - fall back and then charge. No, I kid, there's also a shooting phase in the middle there. but that''s probably a Turn 3+ or situational choice. Loyalist Marine players have two Doctrines they're likely to want to use in the first two turns - again front-loading - both because they can affect the most models on turn 1-2, and because the abilities generally have their best use in the early turns to close distance to mid/back field objectives and the like. Its the Guilliman synergy reworked for 10th.
Hopefully this will be enough bolters for the game and we can look at other stuff.
There's the heavy intercessors to come yet, I suspect that'll be a different bolter again. I'd also wager that incursors/infiltrators now have a bespoke bolter they share.
What do you reckon the chances that ad mech go down to bs4+ are? At least for troops?
I reckon it's a pretty good chance that non elite troops will be bs4+ or worse across the board.
I wouldn't be surprised if they made guardians 4+, or had defenders bs3+ /ws4+ and storm the reverse.
I think admech should go down, the inflation of BS/WS across the game has been a real bugbear of mine since there was a constant gnashing of teeth and wailing the second a stat wasn't 3+ on a unit because it wasn't efficient enough. We need more "average" in the game.
This does propose a problem for orks that we can readily resolve. I've a feeling a shoota will be 18" 2 shot, rapidfire 2 or 3, assault, critical hit 5+. Might be fun to have orks totally immune to modifiers with critical hits but have a native bs of 6+ to represent them hitting despite not aiming.
I imagine the Heavy Bolt Rifle will have done to it what the Bolt Rifle received, so a consolidated profile with some special rules that gives it a boost when sniping, but also on the move, but overall it'll be slightly more damaging than the Bolt Rifle because it's a Heavy Bolt Rifle.
Spoletta wrote: Did you use those things in Darktide? They have a huge recoil, there is no way you can go full auto with them at long range and still hope to hit something.
Which doesn't make a lot of sense given the projectiles are self propelled...
Hopefully this will be enough bolters for the game and we can look at other stuff.
There's the heavy intercessors to come yet, I suspect that'll be a different bolter again. I'd also wager that incursors/infiltrators now have a bespoke bolter they share.
And the Reivers. Plus the Heavy Bolt Pistol you saw on Reivers Option A, Bladeguard etc. I haven't seen a Hurricane Bolter yet either - will that be A12, A6 RF 6 or TL A3 RF3, TL A6 or something else entirely? They split out the Godhammers instead of Twin Linking them, but then Twin Linked the Heavy Bolter. They twin linked the Auto Bolt Fists. It doesn't look like they twinlinked boneswords - or at least the Swarmlord's bone sabres. But they're S9 and he's potentially a named. They Twin Linked the Heavy Bolter and Heavy Flamer on the Bane Blade. The Land Fortress has a couple Twin Linked Bolt Cannon/Ion Beamers. S6 and 7. I can't tell yet, but it looks like they're Twin Linking the anti-infantry stuff, and splitting out the Anti-tank/monster stuff.
What do you reckon the chances that ad mech go down to bs4+ are? At least for troops?
I reckon it's a pretty good chance that non elite troops will be bs4+ or worse across the board.
I wouldn't be surprised if they made guardians 4+, or had defenders bs3+ /ws4+ and storm the reverse.
Kataphron Troops already were BS4 I think? The Skitarii Ranger with a default Galvanic Rifle will probably go to the 4+ [HEAVY] we've been seeing, but the optional options that aren't heavy might stay at 3. Not sure the Vanguard with 18" assault 3's will change to a 4+ either.
I think admech should go down, the inflation of BS/WS across the game has been a real bugbear of mine since there was a constant gnashing of teeth and wailing the second a stat wasn't 3+ on a unit because it wasn't efficient enough. We need more "average" in the game.
This does propose a problem for orks that we can readily resolve. I've a feeling a shoota will be 18" 2 shot, rapidfire 2 or 3, assault, critical hit 5+. Might be fun to have orks totally immune to modifiers with critical hits but have a native bs of 6+ to represent them hitting despite not aiming.
Don't forget exploding 6's. Shoota: [ASSAULT] A1, Rapid Fire 2, Sustained Hits maybe. Or it may stay [DAKKA] for integration in their Faction/Det ability WAAAGH! which doubles the DAKKA but also adds [HAZARDOUS] - as the back ranks shoot up the front ranks in a noise filled cacophony - for the turn in their own version of Dark Pacts. Probably not. That's too much more painful than Dark Pacts. Probably end up with both units dead under a pile of brass. But you get the idea. - as a Prediction, DAKKA stops being a weapon rule and turns into the Detachment rule with the faction rule being WAAAGH!. Shootas will be similar to the ASSAULT A1 RF2 - may or may not have Sustained hits - DAKKA will be some sort of tradeoff/points-redemption to always get Rapid Fire for the given turn - WAAAGH will be something close combat Charge related potentially negating or reinforcing the need for ASSAULT on the Shootas. With any real luck we'll see a return to Shoota and Choppa boys as seperate entities.
Spoletta wrote: Did you use those things in Darktide? They have a huge recoil, there is no way you can go full auto with them at long range and still hope to hit something.
H.B.M.C wrote:Which doesn't make a lot of sense given the projectiles are self propelled...
Wibblywobbly handwaving, but... bolters have a huge kick to them as they use two-phased propulsion, ie. there is a conventional explosive propellant that shoots the bolt out and the self-propelled gyro motion starts mid-flight. If they didn't have this and were straight-up rockets, the gun would be terrible at close ranges and have way less satisfactory bark when they fire. That's why we always see casing on them as well (and not at all due to artistic shorthand and familiarity with regular firearms...), to contain the initial propellant
Again, you're not talking to the points I'm bringing up, and still trying to roll your averages while tooling up 1's for the Chaos player.
Lets assume 36 miracle dice for an entire game. You have the fewest dice when you have the most units. What do you have on your first turn? 1? 2 if you go second, and another 2 if you have two objectives in your backfield with the right unit on it? So four total? How many units do you have? 18 if the CSM have 9?
Now it's turn/round 5, half your stuff is dead giving you 18 Miracle Dice. How many units do you have to use them on? Well, we don't know because we don't know how lethal the game is. Lets assume each side in a balanced game (and assume this is a balanced game) loses half. 9 left. for your 18 miracle dice.
Now lets say you're playing Chaos - its turn one. You have approximately 50-60 Legionary bodies putting out 100-150 shots. Probably closer to 150-200 if you've got a lot of vehicles, Oblits or what-have-you, but lets do 120 shots for easy math. That's 20 6's. That's the floor. We have no idea how many if any mechanics CSM will have for lowering the floor of Critical Hits. After that you've got lets say 60 bodies, 9 units. 3x10 and 6x5 - chances are some of those 5's are going to be 1's or 10's but its too early to know how many which way - of 9 units roughly 25% will fail a first umodified test for a 6+- but then you have rerolls, and bonuses (Abby, Icons etc). So you end up with an average of less than 1 unit taking an average 2 mortal wounds for 20+ Critical Hits and +1CP for Abby from Dark Destiny. Now Round 5, you've got 25-30 models, and 4-5 units. 60 shots is 10 Criticals, Even less of one unit taking 2 Mortals, and the CP for Abby.
Now the weakness of Pact is that you can't control where the 6's land (Not that 120 shots might get 0 6's). And there is something to be said for knowing just how far your unit will advance if you so choose to do so. But not getting to frontload the ability when you have the most bang for your buck may be a serious drawback, as is needing to use up a dice for each unit, as opposed to every unit that does an act uses this 1 dice for this turn and/or you start with X Dice and lose one for each of these scenarios (generally think opposite of when you would gain one except for squad wipe out keep that one as a lose one as the Emperor's Light fades on the battlefield- but as long as one Sister from that squad lives on, you keep that dice because she's a living miracle)
Lets do Doctrines. I've got 50-60 models in 9ish units again and all nine get to advance and shoot, or advance and charge, or - because the secret ingredient in that brownie was especially active - fall back and then charge. No, I kid, there's also a shooting phase in the middle there. but that''s probably a Turn 3+ or situational choice. Loyalist Marine players have two Doctrines they're likely to want to use in the first two turns - again front-loading - both because they can affect the most models on turn 1-2, and because the abilities generally have their best use in the early turns to close distance to mid/back field objectives and the like. Its the Guilliman synergy reworked for 10th.
Haven't checked the maths yet, but this is an interesting breakdown. It feel like Marines and Chaos throwing everything they have in turn one and turn two, thinking "They're only girls, how can they possibly stand against us," while we do our duty and pray for the Emperor's grace.
But then you get to turn 4 and marines are like "Well, we've used all our tricks now and those women are still here!" and Chaos is like, "Yeah, we hurt them, but the dark gods took their toll and the women aren't dead yet."
And sisters are like "Come at me heretic- the Emperor has heard our prayers, and none of the heavy weapons we have left are doing less than full damage for the rest of the game."
Now that's a bit hyperbolic, but the rhythm is there- I believe it to be an intentional design choice and fluffy as feth.
PenitentJake wrote: Haven't checked the maths yet, but this is an interesting breakdown. It feel like Marines and Chaos throwing everything they have in turn one and turn two, thinking "They're only girls, how can they possibly stand against us," while we do our duty and pray for the Emperor's grace.
Well, the Loyalists are holding back by using doctrines (their detachment ability) rather than Oath of Moment (their army ability, the equivalent of AoF), while Chaos is throwing in everything and the kitchen sink (Abby, icons) and they still get screwed. It is kinda funny.
WE up. About as dull as I'd imagine (sorry WE fans).
Leaving aside what its like now (we are at the end of term, have fun stage of the edition) Angron's new resurrection ability feels like something that shouldn't be in the game. Its about a 10% chance unless there are other ways to manipulate it.
"These rules are us trying to make a sensible game. These rules are for fluff and chuck any illusion of balance out the window."
Tyel wrote: WE up. About as dull as I'd imagine (sorry WE fans).
Leaving aside what its like now (we are at the end of term, have fun stage of the edition) Angron's new resurrection ability feels like something that shouldn't be in the game. Its about a 10% chance unless there are other ways to manipulate it.
"These rules are us trying to make a sensible game. These rules are for fluff and chuck any illusion of balance out the window."
Honestly doing me a favour, I really really want WE to be what they are in my head, I've been so close to pulling the trigger on some minis, but manage to get put off by rules.
Tyel wrote: WE up. About as dull as I'd imagine (sorry WE fans).
Leaving aside what its like now (we are at the end of term, have fun stage of the edition) Angron's new resurrection ability feels like something that shouldn't be in the game. Its about a 10% chance unless there are other ways to manipulate it.
"These rules are us trying to make a sensible game. These rules are for fluff and chuck any illusion of balance out the window."
Yeah, resurrecting a model like Angron is just a stupid rule. One interesting question, since he goes into reserves: have the reserve rules changed to allow units to arrive after turn 3?
I'm not sure starting statistical then going max goalpost is the best way to go. Especially when its even easier to suggest Sisters won't get a 6 on their miracle dice because they get far fewer than 100-150 a turn.
Lets assume 36 miracle dice for an entire game. Those will get you six 1s, six 2s, six 3s, six 4s, six 5s, six 6s. 24 dice with 3+. Those 24 dice i can count on, they are already rolled. Thats ten times better than hoping to roll 6s, and not failing LD tests to get MWs.
Your lets say 120 shots will give you 20 6s on average. what will those 6s do ? Its either an automatic wound or an extra hit. Sisters dice can be used for a lot more that just hitting and wounding.
Here's a simulated scenario. This isn't an attempt to agree or disagree, but instead to provide some color.
Four full units of CSM pact. They each have a LC and ML going after a rhino. Statistically one of these units will take 2MW and lose a model. They experience a 26% increase in output by using Sustained Hits.
Regular ( 9.7 total ):
Sustained Hits ( 12.2 total ):
Then four MM from Sisters shoot the same, but they have two miracle dice to use on the damage roll. Sisters get a 14% by using a 4 and 5 on damage and a 23% increase if they use two MD ( 3+ or 4+ moving ) to ensure hits.
But remember, Angron needs a triple 6 to Ressurect, so it’s far from guaranteed.
It's roughly 14% chance of resurrecting, so not far off rolling a 6, though the Icon rule gives some possibility for manipulation there too. It's the type of rule I really hate, because it's not very likely to happen but has a massive impact when it does.
But remember, Angron needs a triple 6 to Ressurect, so it’s far from guaranteed.
It's roughly 14% chance of resurrecting, so not far off rolling a 6, though the Icon rule gives some possibility for manipulation there too. It's the type of rule I really hate, because it's not very likely to happen but has a massive impact when it does.
Decent chance that enhancements, character abilities and strategems may manipulate of the Anger Dice too. Even a single "Count any die as a 6" ability would massively change the odds.
I don't think the Detachment ability for WE was mentioned either.
Because some people held units back in reserve so couldn’t be killed. IIRC there were missions where those ‘saved’ units would count against win conditions.
Or dropped them into a ‘winning location’ in turn five so that the opponent couldn’t do much to stop them.
H.B.M.C. wrote: Why are things forbidden from showing up on Turns 4 and 5 anyway?
I think GW might still be scarred from end of game scoring, where you could have eldar jetbikes hiding in reserves all game and do last minute dashes to objectives to claim objectives in the 11th hour and claim victory.
Tyel wrote: WE up. About as dull as I'd imagine (sorry WE fans).
Leaving aside what its like now (we are at the end of term, have fun stage of the edition) Angron's new resurrection ability feels like something that shouldn't be in the game. Its about a 10% chance unless there are other ways to manipulate it.
"These rules are us trying to make a sensible game. These rules are for fluff and chuck any illusion of balance out the window."
I think they're great. What don't you like about the mechanic?
Tyel wrote: WE up. About as dull as I'd imagine (sorry WE fans).
Leaving aside what its like now (we are at the end of term, have fun stage of the edition) Angron's new resurrection ability feels like something that shouldn't be in the game. Its about a 10% chance unless there are other ways to manipulate it.
"These rules are us trying to make a sensible game. These rules are for fluff and chuck any illusion of balance out the window."
I think they're great. What don't you like about the mechanic?
3 or more sixes in 8 dice has about 34% probability, not around 10%.
Tyel wrote: WE up. About as dull as I'd imagine (sorry WE fans).
Leaving aside what its like now (we are at the end of term, have fun stage of the edition) Angron's new resurrection ability feels like something that shouldn't be in the game. Its about a 10% chance unless there are other ways to manipulate it.
"These rules are us trying to make a sensible game. These rules are for fluff and chuck any illusion of balance out the window."
I think they're great. What don't you like about the mechanic?
For me, its the rolling every turn for what the army can do. And the unpredictability of what your own units are going to be able to do from turn to turn.
From the opposite side of the table, 'suddenly, the entire army has lethal and sustained hits because dice' is just... unfun. Stacking bonuses on top of units that are already pushing the boundaries seems... excessive.
Tyel wrote: WE up. About as dull as I'd imagine (sorry WE fans).
Leaving aside what its like now (we are at the end of term, have fun stage of the edition) Angron's new resurrection ability feels like something that shouldn't be in the game. Its about a 10% chance unless there are other ways to manipulate it.
"These rules are us trying to make a sensible game. These rules are for fluff and chuck any illusion of balance out the window."
I think they're great. What don't you like about the mechanic?
For me, its the rolling every turn for what the army can do. And the unpredictability of what your own units are going to be able to do from turn to turn.
From the opposite side of the table, 'suddenly, the entire army has lethal and sustained hits because dice' is just... unfun. Stacking bonuses on top of units that are already pushing the boundaries seems... excessive.
It's not nearly as unpredictable as it first seems - you can almost-guaranteed use four of these abilities each turn, and the remaining ones have probabilities around 80-70% of being usable each turn. You'll not always be able to use two, and not every ability each turn, but overall the randomness is about comparable to D6-shot attacks or whatever.
Tyel wrote: WE up. About as dull as I'd imagine (sorry WE fans).
Leaving aside what its like now (we are at the end of term, have fun stage of the edition) Angron's new resurrection ability feels like something that shouldn't be in the game. Its about a 10% chance unless there are other ways to manipulate it.
"These rules are us trying to make a sensible game. These rules are for fluff and chuck any illusion of balance out the window."
I think they're great. What don't you like about the mechanic?
For me, its the rolling every turn for what the army can do. And the unpredictability of what your own units are going to be able to do from turn to turn.
From the opposite side of the table, 'suddenly, the entire army has lethal and sustained hits because dice' is just... unfun. Stacking bonuses on top of units that are already pushing the boundaries seems... excessive.
Unpredictability that is affected by how well you control the table and which buffs you need in that moment.
It's not nearly as unpredictable as it first seems - you can almost-guaranteed use four of these abilities each turn, and the remaining ones have probabilities around 80-70% of being usable each turn. You'll not always be able to use two, and not every ability each turn, but overall the randomness is about comparable to D6-shot attacks or whatever.
\shrug. It still isn't a thing I enjoy for my own armies.
For opponents, its that confirmation bias that of course they're going to be able to take the best ones when it matters most. [I'm not arguing that ones I grabbed out of the hat are the best, just being illustrative]
Tyel wrote: WE up. About as dull as I'd imagine (sorry WE fans).
Leaving aside what its like now (we are at the end of term, have fun stage of the edition) Angron's new resurrection ability feels like something that shouldn't be in the game. Its about a 10% chance unless there are other ways to manipulate it.
"These rules are us trying to make a sensible game. These rules are for fluff and chuck any illusion of balance out the window."
I think they're great. What don't you like about the mechanic?
For me, its the rolling every turn for what the army can do. And the unpredictability of what your own units are going to be able to do from turn to turn.
From the opposite side of the table, 'suddenly, the entire army has lethal and sustained hits because dice' is just... unfun. Stacking bonuses on top of units that are already pushing the boundaries seems... excessive.
Agreed. It's the lack of interaction where one player is just playing Yahtzee and their army can go from having Advance and charge and a 6+ FNP one turn, to Lethal Hits, Sustained Hits and a 4+ fight on death the next. At least the old system was more linear and predictable for both players while still providing fluffy bonuses and incentives for the We player.
Tsagualsa wrote: 3 or more sixes in 8 dice has about 34% probability, not around 10%.
I think its about 13.5%?
You're probably calculating for exactly three 6s, but you also need to consider four or more. I worked it out by calculating the probability for 0, 1 or 2 6s and subtracting their sum from 1.
Slipspace wrote: Agreed. It's the lack of interaction where one player is just playing Yahtzee and their army can go from having Advance and charge and a 6+ FNP one turn, to Lethal Hits, Sustained Hits and a 4+ fight on death the next. At least the old system was more linear and predictable for both players while still providing fluffy bonuses and incentives for the We player.
An outcome that you can affect by interacting with berserkers on objectives - from either side.
Slipspace wrote: Agreed. It's the lack of interaction where one player is just playing Yahtzee and their army can go from having Advance and charge and a 6+ FNP one turn, to Lethal Hits, Sustained Hits and a 4+ fight on death the next. At least the old system was more linear and predictable for both players while still providing fluffy bonuses and incentives for the We player.
An outcome that you can affect by interacting with berserkers on objectives - from either side.
oni wrote: Quick question... Do we know if the 10th To Wound table is identical to 8th/9th edition? Are there any new caveats to 6+ always wounds?
People that played the Warhammerfest demo games said it was the same table.
Hmmm... Unfortunate. I was hopeful that the 6+ always wounds would be removed. Especially now that we have quite a few USR's that trigger off of Critical Hit & Wound rolls. It also would have made all toughness stat increases more meaningful. Damn!
oni wrote: Quick question... Do we know if the 10th To Wound table is identical to 8th/9th edition? Are there any new caveats to 6+ always wounds?
People that played the Warhammerfest demo games said it was the same table.
Hmmm... Unfortunate. I was hopeful that the 6+ always wounds would be removed. Especially now that we have quite a few USR's that trigger off of Critical Hit & Wound rolls. It also would have made all toughness stat increases more meaningful. Damn!
Critical hit and wound ARE the "6+ always succeeds" shorthand
oni wrote: Quick question... Do we know if the 10th To Wound table is identical to 8th/9th edition? Are there any new caveats to 6+ always wounds?
People that played the Warhammerfest demo games said it was the same table.
Hmmm... Unfortunate. I was hopeful that the 6+ always wounds would be removed. Especially now that we have quite a few USR's that trigger off of Critical Hit & Wound rolls. It also would have made all toughness stat increases more meaningful. Damn!
Critical hit and wound ARE the "6+ always succeeds" shorthand
Rolling a 6+ on the To Wound roll to trigger an effect does not need to = 6+ always successfully wounds the target.
oni wrote: Quick question... Do we know if the 10th To Wound table is identical to 8th/9th edition? Are there any new caveats to 6+ always wounds?
People that played the Warhammerfest demo games said it was the same table.
Hmmm... Unfortunate. I was hopeful that the 6+ always wounds would be removed. Especially now that we have quite a few USR's that trigger off of Critical Hit & Wound rolls. It also would have made all toughness stat increases more meaningful. Damn!
Critical hit and wound ARE the "6+ always succeeds" shorthand
Rolling a 6+ on the To Wound roll to trigger an effect does not need to = 6+ always successfully wounds the target.
i mean, realistically, its mostly irrelevant, sure a lasgun can wound a titan, but the damage will be negligible.
Some info on the new Gaunt units. The Barbgaunt's disruption rule seems a bit powerful. Assuming split-fire is still a thing, you could potentially slow down most of an opponent's army with just one unit of these.
Daedalus81 wrote: I think they're great. What don't you like about the mechanic?
It was more a whinge about WE than the rules. I think they are boring. Its an incredibly one-dimensional army with half a dozen units all trying to do the same thing.
DG and TS aren't exactly massive rosters - but you can imagine different builds (even if TS players all hate Tzaangor etc).
I don't really mind the murder yahtzee - but it doesn't change that issue for me.
Souleater wrote: GW’s obsession that Khorne cares not from where the blood flows - as long as it’s melee is very limiting.
Whilst I understand the point, the issue is that as long as your tick list is "blood flow" and "takes skulls" It'll lead to melee centric rules. They need to look back at the honourable combatant aspect of khorne and combo it maybe with a heavy shotgun type unit maybe, something that makes a mess of people. Hell, some axe throwers.
Daedalus81 wrote: I think they're great. What don't you like about the mechanic?
It was more a whinge about WE than the rules. I think they are boring. Its an incredibly one-dimensional army with half a dozen units all trying to do the same thing.
DG and TS aren't exactly massive rosters - but you can imagine different builds (even if TS players all hate Tzaangor etc).
I don't really mind the murder yahtzee - but it doesn't change that issue for me.
Mmm, yea. The biggest WE fans are sometimes Orkish in nature.
They at least have some interactivity with the table so just pushing them forward won't always be the best choice. Even with a sticky objectives mission they want lunatics standing still.
Tyel wrote: WE up. About as dull as I'd imagine (sorry WE fans).
Leaving aside what its like now (we are at the end of term, have fun stage of the edition) Angron's new resurrection ability feels like something that shouldn't be in the game. Its about a 10% chance unless there are other ways to manipulate it.
"These rules are us trying to make a sensible game. These rules are for fluff and chuck any illusion of balance out the window."
I think they're great. What don't you like about the mechanic?
For me, its the rolling every turn for what the army can do. And the unpredictability of what your own units are going to be able to do from turn to turn.
From the opposite side of the table, 'suddenly, the entire army has lethal and sustained hits because dice' is just... unfun. Stacking bonuses on top of units that are already pushing the boundaries seems... excessive.
Agreed. It's the lack of interaction where one player is just playing Yahtzee and their army can go from having Advance and charge and a 6+ FNP one turn, to Lethal Hits, Sustained Hits and a 4+ fight on death the next. At least the old system was more linear and predictable for both players while still providing fluffy bonuses and incentives for the We player.
On the upside, they can't have Lethal Hits, Sustained Hits, and the 4+ Fight on Death thing at the same time, as Blessings of Khorne caps you at two picks from the table.
Souleater wrote: GW’s obsession that Khorne cares not from where the blood flows - as long as it’s melee is very limiting.
Flanders would be proud.
GW did exceed my expectations of how much they'd lose once they got their own codex, though.
Anyway, auto-Battleshock if you are blown out of transports is the big reveal from the article. I do wonder if that replaces 'passengers lose models on a 1' or is in addition to it.
Crispy78 wrote: Yeah, getting their own codex ruined WE. Completely flanderised.
Happens with all the Marine sub factions that have had a codex inflicted on them
Mostly GW just chooses the one special word that they think is all the sub faciton is about and put that in front of everything they can possibly think of..sad really
Voss wrote: From the opposite side of the table, 'suddenly, the entire army has lethal and sustained hits because dice' is just... unfun. Stacking bonuses on top of units that are already pushing the boundaries seems... excessive.
Tsagualsa wrote: 3 or more sixes in 8 dice has about 34% probability, not around 10%.
I have two friends trying to use AI to figure this out, and they're getting lower numbers.
How'd you get yours?
Anydice shows here that you've got a 13.48% chance of getting at least three 6s on 8d6.
Changing it to getting at least two 6s is just shy of forty percent.
Tyel wrote: It was more a whinge about WE than the rules. I think they are boring. Its an incredibly one-dimensional army with half a dozen units all trying to do the same thing.
The WE Codex massively Flanderised World Eaters, but I'm holding out hope that, like the Votann, the WE 'Dex is just half their army, and the other half will follow once their 10th 'Dex hits.
Voss wrote: Anyway, auto-Battleshock if you are blown out of transports is the big reveal from the article. I do wonder if that replaces 'passengers lose models on a 1' or is in addition to it.
Let's all hope this is the case.
More "Piling out of a destroyed transport is heavily disorientating, putting the unit in a bad position" and less "Multi-wound models die instantly because you rolled bad".
Voss wrote: Anyway, auto-Battleshock if you are blown out of transports is the big reveal from the article. I do wonder if that replaces 'passengers lose models on a 1' or is in addition to it.
Let's all hope this is the case.
More "Piling out of a destroyed transport is heavily disorientating, putting the unit in a bad position" and less "Multi-wound models die instantly because you rolled bad".
I like the idea that my 10 Karskin gets blown out of their Taurox, the vehicle being gutted in an enormous inferno and disintegrating so hard not even a wreck remains, but all the Karskin get from that is a message from HQ reading "No Strategems 4 U" but otherwise they just dust themselves off ("Hey Joe, you still have a little Taurox on your shoulder!") and start blasting at full strength.
Anyway, auto-Battleshock if you are blown out of transports is the big reveal from the article. I do wonder if that replaces 'passengers lose models on a 1' or is in addition to it.
Wait, what? Where? What article? I can't find it, can you link it for me please?
EDIT: Nevermind, it was a footnote I missed. Thanks anyway.
Anyway, auto-Battleshock if you are blown out of transports is the big reveal from the article. I do wonder if that replaces 'passengers lose models on a 1' or is in addition to it.
Wait, what? Where? What article? I can't find it, can you link it for me please?
Its in the footnote of the World Eaters Faction Focus:
** Note that you still can’t Blood Surge when your TRANSPORT gets destroyed – units forced to disembark when their ride goes boom are automatically Battle-shocked that turn.
Tyel wrote: It was more a whinge about WE than the rules. I think they are boring. Its an incredibly one-dimensional army with half a dozen units all trying to do the same thing.
The WE Codex massively Flanderised World Eaters, but I'm holding out hope that, like the Votann, the WE 'Dex is just half their army, and the other half will follow once their 10th 'Dex hits.
We can definitely hope for more nuanced World Eater units that do more than charge, hack, and slash. Still, what do you expect from a bunch of guys with the Butcher Nails in their heads?
Haven't checked the maths yet, but this is an interesting breakdown. It feel like Marines and Chaos throwing everything they have in turn one and turn two, thinking "They're only girls, how can they possibly stand against us," while we do our duty and pray for the Emperor's grace.
But then you get to turn 4 and marines are like "Well, we've used all our tricks now and those women are still here!" and Chaos is like, "Yeah, we hurt them, but the dark gods took their toll and the women aren't dead yet."
And sisters are like "Come at me heretic- the Emperor has heard our prayers, and none of the heavy weapons we have left are doing less than full damage for the rest of the game."
Now that's a bit hyperbolic, but the rhythm is there- I believe it to be an intentional design choice and fluffy as feth.
Well I'm not sure Loyalist SM vs Sisters is fluffy but I get what you mean. But fluffy doesn't always work either - and I'm not sure Sisters would still be around that late in a game that that gnashes its teeth over First Round First Turn Because Alpha Strikes as much as "we" do. Maybe the lethality reduction is enough to make this workable, but that's a big maybe.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Tyel wrote: WE up. About as dull as I'd imagine (sorry WE fans).
Leaving aside what its like now (we are at the end of term, have fun stage of the edition) Angron's new resurrection ability feels like something that shouldn't be in the game. Its about a 10% chance unless there are other ways to manipulate it.
"These rules are us trying to make a sensible game. These rules are for fluff and chuck any illusion of balance out the window."
I'm not sure why Loyalist SM can One Turn Only Charge and Advance, while WE can One-Turn-Only Charge And Advance (But only if you roll double 6's or Triple 4+'s first). I like the resurrection rule, but "at full wounds" might be a little much.
But remember, Angron needs a triple 6 to Ressurect, so it’s far from guaranteed.
Depends on if you play the way they're pushing you to. Roll 8 Dice - not quite a 50/50 to get two sixes. Have some Icons in units on objectives, reroll a few dice to get not quite 50/50 another 6. A lot of these abilities are part of the new Troops Carrot/stick. AOS was the trial baloon to get rid of requiring Troops, all these "on an objective" abilities, especially for The Basic Units Formerly Known as Troops are the way they're not going to force you, just strongly strongly encourage you to take them.
Anyway, auto-Battleshock if you are blown out of transports is the big reveal from the article. I do wonder if that replaces 'passengers lose models on a 1' or is in addition to it.
Wait, what? Where? What article? I can't find it, can you link it for me please?
Its in the footnote of the World Eaters Faction Focus:
** Note that you still can’t Blood Surge when your TRANSPORT gets destroyed – units forced to disembark when their ride goes boom are automatically Battle-shocked that turn.
That turn. I've been hoping they'll leak what happens after you're battleshocked. Can you Un-Battleshock (Rally Phase?) yourself? Do you have to be at least 25%/50% strength?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Souleater wrote: For Angron’s Reborn in Blood ability it says ‘use triple 6s from the Blood Blessings roll’ to bring him back.
Would that count as one of your two blessings for the turn?
Does it mean that those triples can’t be used for anything else?
Not sure if it counts as one of your two blessings - Strict reading of the rule says this isn't one of your two as the rule says two from [this] list and his ability is both not on the list, nor is the ability named as [this] list, but you do use 3 6's which will make it hard to use any others - you're left with 5 dice some of which were probably rerolled out of pre-existing doubles to get the 3rd 6 to bring back Angron.
Depends on if you play the way they're pushing you to. Roll 8 Dice - not quite a 50/50 to get two sixes. Have some Icons in units on objectives, reroll a few dice to get not quite 50/50 another 6. A lot of these abilities are part of the new Troops Carrot/stick. AOS was the trial baloon to get rid of requiring Troops, all these "on an objective" abilities, especially for The Basic Units Formerly Known as Troops are the way they're not going to force you, just strongly strongly encourage you to take
??
You & I must not be playing the same editions of AoS....
Because for AoS Matched Play you 100% have to take x # of Battleline (what your calling "troops") units.
It's spelled out for you on a chart based on size of game along with how may units of other types you may/must include.
alextroy wrote: We can definitely hope for more nuanced World Eater units that do more than charge, hack, and slash. Still, what do you expect from a bunch of guys with the Butcher Nails in their heads?
I don't expect them to be able to secure objectives let alone get bonuses from it, so there you go. The next WE unit can be a tacticool stealthy sniper for all I know.
alextroy wrote: We can definitely hope for more nuanced World Eater units that do more than charge, hack, and slash. Still, what do you expect from a bunch of guys with the Butcher Nails in their heads?
I don't expect them to be able to secure objectives let alone get bonuses from it, so there you go. The next WE unit can be a tacticool stealthy sniper for all I know.
Lol. Many of the games where I've played my WE have come down to me holding objectives because that's where I've killed my opponents pieces.
1st because I charged them there, then2nd when I was counter-charged....
alextroy wrote: We can definitely hope for more nuanced World Eater units that do more than charge, hack, and slash. Still, what do you expect from a bunch of guys with the Butcher Nails in their heads?
I don't expect them to be able to secure objectives let alone get bonuses from it, so there you go. The next WE unit can be a tacticool stealthy sniper for all I know.
Lol. Many of the games where I've played my WE have come down to me holding objectives because that's where I've killed my opponents pieces.
1st because I charged them there, then2nd when I was counter-charged....
That turn. I've been hoping they'll leak what happens after you're battleshocked. Can you Un-Battleshock (Rally Phase?) yourself? Do you have to be at least 25%/50% strength?
I think you auto-rally. In the discription of the effects of battleshock, it explictly says "until the START of your next command phase, that unit is Battle-shocked ". Emphasis mine, but clearly its something auto-recover form.
unless thiers some rule in place that states a unit battleshocked on the enemy turn as a direct result of thier action stays battleshocked through your turn, then the effects of "out of sequence" battleshocking would likely just be limited to your enemies turn. that would still matter, they would fight worse in melee, not be supportable with strats, etc.
alextroy wrote: We can definitely hope for more nuanced World Eater units that do more than charge, hack, and slash. Still, what do you expect from a bunch of guys with the Butcher Nails in their heads?
I don't expect them to be able to secure objectives let alone get bonuses from it, so there you go. The next WE unit can be a tacticool stealthy sniper for all I know.
I'm hoping someone from GW reads/read the Incarnations of Immortality series and decides to recycle that "controlled berserker" thing from the Incarnation of War book. Such that the Butcher's Nails ebb and flow as they need to fight, or think/control objectives etc.
Depends on if you play the way they're pushing you to. Roll 8 Dice - not quite a 50/50 to get two sixes. Have some Icons in units on objectives, reroll a few dice to get not quite 50/50 another 6. A lot of these abilities are part of the new Troops Carrot/stick. AOS was the trial baloon to get rid of requiring Troops, all these "on an objective" abilities, especially for The Basic Units Formerly Known as Troops are the way they're not going to force you, just strongly strongly encourage you to take
??
You & I must not be playing the same editions of AoS....
Because for AoS Matched Play you 100% have to take x # of Battleline (what your calling "troops") units.
It's spelled out for you on a chart based on size of game along with how may units of other types you may/must include.
I'm not sure what's going on here? I don't play AOS, and you have Penitent Jake saying something I actually said - you may not have clipped your quotes correctly on the matched quote and /quote tags?
The WE Codex massively Flanderised World Eaters, but I'm holding out hope that, like the Votann, the WE 'Dex is just half their army, and the other half will follow once their 10th 'Dex hits.
It was already leaked that only one miniature was not revealed nor tested and it is a Berzerker-Surgeon.
That's what WE are going to get in 10th. They will be a "1 miniature + Codex" release.
PenitentJake wrote: There are some quotes attributed to me on this page that I did not post.
tracing the train of quotes, it seems that particular quote ("Depends on if you play the way they're pushing you to. Roll 8 Dice - not quite a 50/50 to get two sixes..."etc ) is originally form Breton, in a message where he was quoting you. Im guessing that someone just messed up when pruning the quote tree down, and it ended up in a quote box with your name on it.
Looking at the mechanicus preview, Rad Bombardment is neat. Seems like potentially a lot of rolling for not much effect, but I like the idea of having a rule that represents some pre-battle efforts. Giving opponents the choice of being battle shocked vs taking damage on turn 1 seems like a decent way to give opponents a way of interacting with it too.
I could see something vaguely similar being used to represent tricky factions like Alpha Legion, Poisoned Tongue, etc. who generally try to stack the deck in their favor before the fight begins.
EightFoldPath wrote: Seems people are a bit sick of the slow drip of information being released based on the post frequency here today.
It's more that we're at a point where unless it's your faction or a big chunk of core rules there's isn't much more other than wanting the rules themselves.
EightFoldPath wrote: Seems people are a bit sick of the slow drip of information being released based on the post frequency here today.
It's more that we're at a point where unless it's your faction or a big chunk of core rules there's isn't much more other than wanting the rules themselves.
I'm ready to pitch in $20 for someone to leak the damn book already....barring that then the cards for one army.
A troops unit is good.
The main faction special character you may or may not own/use - "meh".
Some super-gun, often on a current LoW you may or may not own/use - "meh".
(Maybe its my lack of Timmy...)
I mean what are we thinking for Eldar tommorow? Guardians, the Avatar and a Fire Prism gun? The guardians admittedly interest me. I imagine however the Avatar will be choppy and the Prism Cannon will be shooty.
I guess there could be some expansion on Harlequins/Ynnari/Corsairs etc. But given limited space I wouldn't bet on it.
A troops unit is good.
The main faction special character you may or may not own/use - "meh".
Some super-gun, often on a current LoW you may or may not own/use - "meh".
(Maybe its my lack of Timmy...)
I mean what are we thinking for Eldar tommorow? Guardians, the Avatar and a Fire Prism gun? The guardians admittedly interest me. I imagine however the Avatar will be choppy and the Prism Cannon will be shooty.
I guess there could be some expansion on Harlequins/Ynnari/Corsairs etc. But given limited space I wouldn't bet on it.
In the interest of giving us no useful information whatsoever, it will be something like the Yncarne and barebones Guardians
I mean what are we thinking for Eldar tommorow? Guardians, the Avatar and a Fire Prism gun? The guardians admittedly interest me. I imagine however the Avatar will be choppy and the Prism Cannon will be shooty.
I guess there could be some expansion on Harlequins/Ynnari/Corsairs etc. But given limited space I wouldn't bet on it.
If it's an asuryani update, I think you've probably guessed it exactly right. Maybe the wraith knight instead of the Avatar. They'll probably show off Eldrad instead of a farseer.
That said, it's labeled as an "aeldari" preview rather than asuryani. Not sure if that's because they've given up on making the term "asuryani" a thing (non-eldar players all seem to think that "aeldari" means "craftworlders") or if it's because they're going to lump a bunch of the pointy ears together for a single preview.
Harlies and Ynnari are in the Aeldari datacard box so they're all together at the moment. No idea if the article will try and deal with all of those factions or if they'll all be one mash up until the codex(es).
I mean what are we thinking for Eldar tommorow? Guardians, the Avatar and a Fire Prism gun? The guardians admittedly interest me. I imagine however the Avatar will be choppy and the Prism Cannon will be shooty.
I guess there could be some expansion on Harlequins/Ynnari/Corsairs etc. But given limited space I wouldn't bet on it.
If it's an asuryani update, I think you've probably guessed it exactly right. Maybe the wraith knight instead of the Avatar. They'll probably show off Eldrad instead of a farseer.
That said, it's labeled as an "aeldari" preview rather than asuryani. Not sure if that's because they've given up on making the term "asuryani" a thing (non-eldar players all seem to think that "aeldari" means "craftworlders") or if it's because they're going to lump a bunch of the pointy ears together for a single preview.
Given the stat nerfs we've seen to BS and Sv/invuln on several factions (the skitarii went from 4+ to 5+ and from 5++ to 6++) Imagine the guardians will go back to 5+ (Despite wearing full body suits of carapace armour on the models...) and probably drop to BS/WS 4+.
One of the few things I've liked about the eldar in the later editions is the guardians not turning into tissue paper that get slaughtered in droves, given how obsessive the eldar are about protecting their population. Will be pissed if they lose even more survivability.
Unless they're getting some kind of army wide 'speed protection' bonus, they will go back to being the most advanced horde army in the game...
EightFoldPath wrote: Seems people are a bit sick of the slow drip of information being released based on the post frequency here today.
It's more that we're at a point where unless it's your faction or a big chunk of core rules there's isn't much more other than wanting the rules themselves.
I'm ready to pitch in $20 for someone to leak the damn book already....barring that then the cards for one army.
That's closer to accurate. The controlled release means only a couple new things show up - if that - and we're ready to start parsing bigger chucks of interactions.
A troops unit is good.
The main faction special character you may or may not own/use - "meh".
Some super-gun, often on a current LoW you may or may not own/use - "meh".
(Maybe its my lack of Timmy...)
I mean what are we thinking for Eldar tommorow? Guardians, the Avatar and a Fire Prism gun? The guardians admittedly interest me. I imagine however the Avatar will be choppy and the Prism Cannon will be shooty.
I guess there could be some expansion on Harlequins/Ynnari/Corsairs etc. But given limited space I wouldn't bet on it.
The Eldar character will tell us more about where they're going with the Eldar than it will tell us about the special character - the Avatar will be generic Eldar, Uldrad means they'll get an Ulthwe focus this edition, Yncarne etc....
EightFoldPath wrote: Seems people are a bit sick of the slow drip of information being released based on the post frequency here today.
It's more that we're at a point where unless it's your faction or a big chunk of core rules there's isn't much more other than wanting the rules themselves.
I'm ready to pitch in $20 for someone to leak the damn book already....barring that then the cards for one army.
We're talking probably around a month until the pre-order window starts, and then another couple of weeks until release - do you really not have the patience to wait that long?
EightFoldPath wrote: Seems people are a bit sick of the slow drip of information being released based on the post frequency here today.
It's more that we're at a point where unless it's your faction or a big chunk of core rules there's isn't much more other than wanting the rules themselves.
I'm ready to pitch in $20 for someone to leak the damn book already....barring that then the cards for one army.
We're talking probably around a month until the pre-order window starts, and then another couple of weeks until release - do you really not have the patience to wait that long?
For me this is the "painting catch up window" so the backlog is minimised before a big box lands, so happy to wait.
I mean what are we thinking for Eldar tommorow? Guardians, the Avatar and a Fire Prism gun? The guardians admittedly interest me. I imagine however the Avatar will be choppy and the Prism Cannon will be shooty.
I guess there could be some expansion on Harlequins/Ynnari/Corsairs etc. But given limited space I wouldn't bet on it.
If it's an asuryani update, I think you've probably guessed it exactly right. Maybe the wraith knight instead of the Avatar. They'll probably show off Eldrad instead of a farseer.
That said, it's labeled as an "aeldari" preview rather than asuryani. Not sure if that's because they've given up on making the term "asuryani" a thing (non-eldar players all seem to think that "aeldari" means "craftworlders") or if it's because they're going to lump a bunch of the pointy ears together for a single preview.
Given the stat nerfs we've seen to BS and Sv/invuln on several factions (the skitarii went from 4+ to 5+ and from 5++ to 6++) Imagine the guardians will go back to 5+ (Despite wearing full body suits of carapace armour on the models...) and probably drop to BS/WS 4+.
One of the few things I've liked about the eldar in the later editions is the guardians not turning into tissue paper that get slaughtered in droves, given how obsessive the eldar are about protecting their population. Will be pissed if they lose even more survivability.
Unless they're getting some kind of army wide 'speed protection' bonus, they will go back to being the most advanced horde army in the game...
I'm expecting CWE to have Fate Dice as the Army faction rule instead of a speed bonus. So if we're hoping for a "enemy models have -1 to Hit outside X inches" or "enemy models have -1 hit if you advanced" speed bonus kind of rule it will probably be limited to detachment or the unit.
I'm expecting Guardians to drop to BS/WS 4+ but I'm hopeful they keep the better Armor Save. I just really, really, hope they don't nerf the catapult ranges again.
EightFoldPath wrote: Seems people are a bit sick of the slow drip of information being released based on the post frequency here today.
It's more that we're at a point where unless it's your faction or a big chunk of core rules there's isn't much more other than wanting the rules themselves.
I'm ready to pitch in $20 for someone to leak the damn book already....barring that then the cards for one army.
We're talking probably around a month until the pre-order window starts, and then another couple of weeks until release - do you really not have the patience to wait that long?
In age of internet patience is short on supply
Personally have no interest playing with leaked pdf's and gw games are solved so quickly no need to even get rules this early to have it solved for first game so no rush.
Famous last words, but I'll be surprised if Guardians are BS4+ etc unless - like the other supposedly nerfed factions - they have easy access to +1 to hit bringing them back to a 3+ built in.
Personally have no interest playing with leaked pdf's and gw games are solved so quickly no need to even get rules this early to have it solved for first game so no rush.
It is kind of a important to know, if you are not buying bad units for future edition, or have the potential last call to sell units or even an army, which maybe impossible to sell as 10th progresses. If lets say DW in 10th were to be like regular assault termintors, only more expensive and with worse rules per point costs, a player who owns 30 would probably want to know it right now and not a week in to the edition. And that is just the regular players, if someone is in to tournaments, starting to train for the next seson with the next set of rules, before others do gives a huge adventage. Even if it is just play test rules based games.
