Revarien wrote:Personally, I'd rather use the 2nd ed codex over this... 4in movement and everything...

Ixquic wrote:

Revarien wrote:Personally, I'd rather use the 2nd ed codex over this... 4in movement and everything...

Yeah but you get T4 and I4

baron deathnyx wrote:I can,t wait to see what they look like in platic and finecast

AllistorPreist wrote:

baron deathnyx wrote:I can,t wait to see what they look like in platic and finecast

Turns out you can, and will wait to see the platic and resin sisters. At least until whenever they decide the "real" codex is due to come out. Not that I am bitter.

ShumaGorath wrote:

Ixquic wrote:

Revarien wrote:Personally, I'd rather use the 2nd ed codex over this... 4in movement and everything...

Yeah but you get T4 and I4

And throwing grenades! Just don't run into the guy playing 2nd ed chaos.

pretre wrote:

The Grog wrote:Remember that SoB have no assault vehicles, so you will be telegraphing your DCA assault terribly.

Or counter-charging. Yes, chances of that unit actually getting off an assault? Low.

The Grog wrote:

pretre wrote:

The Grog wrote:Remember that SoB have no assault vehicles, so you will be telegraphing your DCA assault terribly.

Or counter-charging. Yes, chances of that unit actually getting off an assault? Low.

Considering how mech is likely to play, counter-assault is the best bet. Put one rhino full of them a bit behind 2-3 others, so when you dump your Sisters out, shoot, inevitably get assaulted, and then probably wiped out, you'll at least have a cleanup unit. This is an option we didn't have before. No unit in the previous codex has anywhere near the melee power of 9 DCA. It's a shame they can't benefit from the Cannoness act.

Now, do they have fleet, and does attaching Uriah prevent fleet? Matters a lot in positioning, as you don't want what just killed your SoB squads to consolidate out of range.

ShumaGorath wrote:Why you would want a recast of some of the ugliest models still in GWs range I will never know.

Really? I've always thought the Canoness (V2) and St Celestine were two of GWs best sculpts. Especially given their age.

Mythal wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:Why you would want a recast of some of the ugliest models still in GWs range I will never know.

Really? I've always thought the Canoness (V2) and St Celestine were two of GWs best sculpts. Especially given their age. Of course, now that I've got the second half of the Codex and have sat and costed up 2,000 and 3,000 point standard FOC lists, it looks like Canoness Cassiopeia has finally been elevated to Sainthood - so I won't be fielding my Canoness model any more, at least under the standard FOC. I'm definitely taking Uriah - I can't not, given how gloriously fluffy I can make his unit. And I'm not passing up on the new St Celestine stats and cost - but it's kinda fluffy for my force anyway, since Cassiopeia's schtick has always been surviving blows that should surely have been fatal (farewell, 2++ and Mantle of Ophelia - I'll miss you, but we had good times while they lasted) and the new Canoness crunch doesn't reflect that.

Looking at the new points costs, they certainly aren't where I would have hoped them to be. But having theorycrafted a few lists, I think the new Codex will at least be serviceable. Undergeared compared to the new bookdexes, obviously - no flying assault transports or grey hunters - but solid enough. I admit I found the Batrep thoroughly disingenuous - "Oh, Sisters of Battle lack long-range high strength weapons! Quick, make sure the Batrep features a Fortress they can crib twin-linked Lascannons from at no points cost!", and "Oh gosh-darnit, my Genestealers are taking longer to reach the table than Boromir took to die". And the list Cruddace fielded shows he knows nothing about the Codex he himself authored - not least, the specials/model ratio on Dominions. But all that said, I've stuck with Sisters since they got their first book Codex - and I'll be damned if rules written by someone who only considered collecting the army a decade after I started with them is going to stop me.

ShumaGorath wrote:

Really? I've always thought the Canoness (V2) and St Celestine were two of GWs best sculpts. Especially given their age.

I mostly mean the sisters themselves and anything thats a different type of basic "sister" (seraphim, etc). The canoness has a pretty impressive manface. Gives space marine scouts a run for their money.

Mythal wrote:
Looking at the new points costs, they certainly aren't where I would have hoped them to be. But having theorycrafted a few lists, I think the new Codex will at least be serviceable. Undergeared compared to the new bookdexes, obviously - no flying assault transports or grey hunters - but solid enough. I admit I found the Batrep thoroughly disingenuous - "Oh, Sisters of Battle lack long-range high strength weapons! Quick, make sure the Batrep features a Fortress they can crib twin-linked Lascannons from at no points cost!", and "Oh gosh-darnit, my Genestealers are taking longer to reach the table than Boromir took to die". And the list Cruddace fielded shows he knows nothing about the Codex he himself authored - not least, the specials/model ratio on Dominions. But all that said, I've stuck with Sisters since they got their first book Codex - and I'll be damned if rules written by someone who only considered collecting the army a decade after I started with them is going to stop me.

Kreedos wrote:Try out a game with them before you shelf them guys, trust me on this.

Kreedos wrote:

Faith isn't important anymore, not at all...

Kreedos wrote:Try out a game with them before you shelf them guys, trust me on this.

I never understood why people think Sisters should look like straight up females. Most women that serve in the military look fairly mannish, why would even more fanatical battle women give any kind of a crap of what they look like? I think they're way too busy beating wholesale face in. Also shorter hair makes more sense, esp considering all the flamers they shoot.

Ixquic wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

Ixquic wrote:

Revarien wrote:Personally, I'd rather use the 2nd ed codex over this... 4in movement and everything...

Yeah but you get T4 and I4

And throwing grenades! Just don't run into the guy playing 2nd ed chaos.

Wiping out my friend's 500 point Chaos super lord with a vortex grenade from a 15 point Sergeant was the highlight of 40k for me.

ShumaGorath wrote:

I never understood why people think Sisters should look like straight up females. Most women that serve in the military look fairly mannish, why would even more fanatical battle women give any kind of a crap of what they look like? I think they're way too busy beating wholesale face in. Also shorter hair makes more sense, esp considering all the flamers they shoot.

They should look like straight up females because they are. Dramatically increased testosterone can change facial features, but not as much as they seem to on the faces of several sister models. They're just badly sculpted. The bodies are to blocky as well.

DarknessEternal wrote:
Just let them stomp around and cry. Anything else is futile.

pretre wrote:You don't really need the Canoness act on that unit. Canoness gives +1 I and Preferred Enemy, doesn't it?

Uriah gives them PE on the charge and they are already I6.

I don't see Fleet in part one, but maybe P2 has it.

The Decapitator wrote:Well I used to think the Valkarie Vendetta was the most underpriced unit in the game.

Now I'm thinking Celestine is a definate contender!

With her points cost and Jacobus's rules, they are an almost certainty in most armies.

Kreedos wrote:Try out a game with them before you shelf them guys, trust me on this.

ph34r wrote:On average, she dies every turn to 5 chimeras shooting multilasers at her or 2 marines rapid firing plasma guns.

Cheddah wrote:

ph34r wrote:On average, she dies every turn to 5 chimeras shooting multilasers at her or 2 marines rapid firing plasma guns.

Why would you run her out into the open on her own to get shot at?

[edit]Also, I would say she's worth her points if an opponent is dedicating 5 chimeras to take just her down.[/edit]

ph34r wrote:I don't "get" how you could think this new list is actually better than the old.

ph34r wrote:

Kreedos wrote:Try out a game with them before you shelf them guys, trust me on this.

Oh yeah? Is your brilliant new army an inferior razorspam plus seraphim or something?

I don't "get" how you could think this new list is actually better than the old.

DarknessEternal wrote:
Just let them stomp around and cry. Anything else is futile.

Mythal wrote:The question is whether or not it can function, not whether or not it will function as well as the old book or whether or not it will be as competitive as Codex: Blood Angels or Codex: Space Wolves.

In my case, at least, it's more a question of immovable stubbornness in the face of overwhelming adversity rather than an (IMO erroneous) belief in the new Codex being better.

sharkticon wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

I never understood why people think Sisters should look like straight up females. Most women that serve in the military look fairly mannish, why would even more fanatical battle women give any kind of a crap of what they look like? I think they're way too busy beating wholesale face in. Also shorter hair makes more sense, esp considering all the flamers they shoot.

They should look like straight up females because they are. Dramatically increased testosterone can change facial features, but not as much as they seem to on the faces of several sister models. They're just badly sculpted. The bodies are to blocky as well.

Maybe they are transsexuals? It would get around the no men under arms rule, and explain the sculpts.

ph34r wrote:Oh yeah? Is your brilliant new army an inferior razorspam plus seraphim or something?

I don't "get" how you could think this new list is actually better than the old.

Cheddah wrote:I'm a little confused. In part 1 of the codex it seemed to imply that "ecclesiarchy preachers" could run with a battle conclave, but in part 2 "ecclisiarchy priests" (I'm assuming they are the same unit, as their stat lines are the same and that their name was borked in print) it seems like they are weak IC elites which you can field up to 5 of for 45 points each minus the bodyguards. Could someone clarify this for me?

streamdragon wrote:I'm not denying it can function; just whether or not I plan to bother with it.

CT GAMER wrote:

sharkticon wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

I never understood why people think Sisters should look like straight up females. Most women that serve in the military look fairly mannish, why would even more fanatical battle women give any kind of a crap of what they look like? I think they're way too busy beating wholesale face in. Also shorter hair makes more sense, esp considering all the flamers they shoot.

They should look like straight up females because they are. Dramatically increased testosterone can change facial features, but not as much as they seem to on the faces of several sister models. They're just badly sculpted. The bodies are to blocky as well.

Maybe they are transsexuals? It would get around the no men under arms rule, and explain the sculpts.

To be honest the fact that most of the "BOOBS111" gamer crowd doesnt find them sexy enough was always a plus in my book as it meant that most of those guys found some other army to be creepy playing...

Mythal wrote:In fairness, I've not yet spoken to anyone who thinks this list is better than Codex: Witch Hunters. Well, nobody who plays the army, anyways - plenty of trolls who play other armies, obviously, but we can ignore them. The question is whether or not it can function, not whether or not it will function as well as the old book or whether or not it will be as competitive as Codex: Blood Angels or Codex: Space Wolves.

In my case, at least, it's more a question of immovable stubbornness in the face of overwhelming adversity rather than an (IMO erroneous) belief in the new Codex being better.

Point is I'm trying to make is that people need to not listen as much to the internet doomsday machine and instead play it themselves and see what it's like. As for me, after playing them I'm not nearly as mad or jaded about the army, and I believe others should do the same.

CT GAMER wrote:

sharkticon wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

I never understood why people think Sisters should look like straight up females. Most women that serve in the military look fairly mannish, why would even more fanatical battle women give any kind of a crap of what they look like? I think they're way too busy beating wholesale face in. Also shorter hair makes more sense, esp considering all the flamers they shoot.

They should look like straight up females because they are. Dramatically increased testosterone can change facial features, but not as much as they seem to on the faces of several sister models. They're just badly sculpted. The bodies are to blocky as well.

Maybe they are transsexuals? It would get around the no men under arms rule, and explain the sculpts.

To be honest the fact that most of the "BOOBS111" gamer crowd doesnt find them sexy enough was always a plus in my book as it meant that most of those guys found some other army to be creepy playing...

ShumaGorath wrote:Don't confuse the two, or my intentions here. You want to play with old hunks of metal crap then feel free. I'm standing by the notion that it's bizarre to want recasts of bad old models.

ShumaGorath wrote:

CT GAMER wrote:

sharkticon wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

I never understood why people think Sisters should look like straight up females. Most women that serve in the military look fairly mannish, why would even more fanatical battle women give any kind of a crap of what they look like? I think they're way too busy beating wholesale face in. Also shorter hair makes more sense, esp considering all the flamers they shoot.

They should look like straight up females because they are. Dramatically increased testosterone can change facial features, but not as much as they seem to on the faces of several sister models. They're just badly sculpted. The bodies are to blocky as well.

Maybe they are transsexuals? It would get around the no men under arms rule, and explain the sculpts.

To be honest the fact that most of the "BOOBS111" gamer crowd doesnt find them sexy enough was always a plus in my book as it meant that most of those guys found some other army to be creepy playing...

Theres a distinct difference between sexualized models (infinity) and gakky modeling work (sisters of battle). Don't confuse the two, or my intentions here. You want to play with old hunks of metal crap then feel free. I'm standing by the notion that it's bizarre to want recasts of bad old models.

CT GAMER wrote:
I think some of the SOB sculpts still hold up today as great models.

CT GAMER wrote:
The sexualized nature (or degree of) of SOB models is something that is lobg debated and discussed. Some people want half naked D-cupped SOB. Those are the types that I always was happy didn't take up the army tbh...

Kreedos wrote:

CT GAMER wrote:
The sexualized nature (or degree of) of SOB models is something that is lobg debated and discussed. Some people want half naked D-cupped SOB. Those are the types that I always was happy didn't take up the army tbh...

Those types of people, now most likely play TAU, the anime army.

Eumerin wrote:

Kreedos wrote:

CT GAMER wrote:
The sexualized nature (or degree of) of SOB models is something that is lobg debated and discussed. Some people want half naked D-cupped SOB. Those are the types that I always was happy didn't take up the army tbh...

Those types of people, now most likely play TAU, the anime army.

Would have thought they'd have gone Chaos Daemons (Slaanesh), myself.

Mythal wrote:

ph34r wrote:I don't "get" how you could think this new list is actually better than the old.

In fairness, I've not yet spoken to anyone who thinks this list is better than Codex: Witch Hunters. Well, nobody who plays the army, anyways - plenty of trolls who play other armies, obviously, but we can ignore them. The question is whether or not it can function, not whether or not it will function as well as the old book or whether or not it will be as competitive as Codex: Blood Angels or Codex: Space Wolves.

In my case, at least, it's more a question of immovable stubbornness in the face of overwhelming adversity rather than an (IMO erroneous) belief in the new Codex being better.

Kreedos wrote:

CT GAMER wrote:
The sexualized nature (or degree of) of SOB models is something that is lobg debated and discussed. Some people want half naked D-cupped SOB. Those are the types that I always was happy didn't take up the army tbh...

Those types of people, now most likely play TAU, the anime army.

Sidstyler wrote:
Speak for yourself, I play Tau and I hate "half-naked D-cupped SOB" more than anyone.

Kreedos wrote:


However, I think TAU don't fit with 40k very well at all.

Kreedos wrote:

ph34r wrote:Oh yeah? Is your brilliant new army an inferior razorspam plus seraphim or something?

I don't "get" how you could think this new list is actually better than the old.

I never said the new list is better than the old in fact I think the exact opposite and have stated as such though out this thread. I'm simply trying to be optimistic and just enjoy my army, even if they aren't a high power level codex. In my game I played, I saw good results and fairly decent play with this new army. I will continue to do so, and if enough time passes and they aren't working for me, I'll eventually shelve them and play my GK or Necrons. Point is I'm trying to make is that people need to not listen as much to the internet doomsday machine and instead play it themselves and see what it's like. As for me, after playing them I'm not nearly as mad or jaded about the army, and I believe others should do the same.

And pheer the insulting sarcasm really isn't unnecessary, I understand you're all pissed and ragey about the book but I'm not the one that wrote it. Still, forgive me for being positive at all because apparently that's not allowed, sorry man, my bad.

AllistorPreist wrote:Most of us aren't saying that the army cannot be played, just that it is a massive disappointment.

Kreedos wrote:

AllistorPreist wrote:Most of us aren't saying that the army cannot be played, just that it is a massive disappointment.

Most people are saying it can't be played, or it's staying on the shelf without even giving it a run, so I'm going to have to disagree with you there. Now what people say and what people do are two completely different things though.

troy_tempest wrote:I've played Tau intensively since 2009 and I have had to fight tooth and nail in almost every game to get a win or draw.

Played the new SoB rules twice now (using old dex point costs) vs. vanilla marines and guard. The easiest two victories I've ever had.

If people really want to complain about a terrible codex I recommend a few games using Tau or Necrons, especially at low points.

troy_tempest wrote:I've played Tau intensively since 2009 and I have had to fight tooth and nail in almost every game to get a win or draw.

Played the new SoB rules twice now (using old dex point costs) vs. vanilla marines and guard. The easiest two victories I've ever had.

If people really want to complain about a terrible codex I recommend a few games using Tau or Necrons, especially at low points.

Thinks that 10 sisters in a Rhino with special weapons should not cost almost as much as 10 marines in a rhino with special weapons? Almost every danged one.

ShumaGorath wrote:

Thinks that 10 sisters in a Rhino with special weapons should not cost almost as much as 10 marines in a rhino with special weapons? Almost every danged one.

I don't know what magic hat you're pulling those marine points values from, especially when the base cost for 10 marines with a single flamer (free) and rhino is 205. 210 for a melta, 220 for two meltas (one being combi), 245 with a fist.

The optimal build for a marine squad is roughly 20-25% more expensive then the optimal build for a sister squad. The sisters army is a much more cohesive force while a sisters squad can bring 50% more special weapon firepower the turn they dump out of the rhino and the same number and effectiveness for bolters (irrelevant as they are). High firepower low point values squads are preferable in this meta, the tactical squad won't survive the grey knight/ork/wolfwolves/mephiston/ig template any better then the sisters will, and you'll do more damage before you explode.

If we're talking grey hunters then I don't know what to tell you other then the fact that that entire codex is bs. Most other marines can't compare point for point. I pay 13 per model for scouts.

Kreedos wrote:
Sister of Battle x 10 - 195
Combi Flamer, Heavy Flamer, Flamer
Rhino

Try swaping that multi melta for a missile launcher. But the number I got for the sisters was from Kreedo's list a few pages back 220 for a melta, a combi melta and missile seems pretty close to 195 for a melta and Heavy Flamer. I promised I wasn't gonna do misery poker, but seriously, nilla marines aren't that bad and the only reason the "optimal" build is 25% more is because of all the extra options.

Kreedos wrote:Most people are saying it can't be played

Kreedos wrote:Try out a game with them before you shelf them guys, trust me on this.

CT GAMER wrote:

Kreedos wrote:


However, I think TAU don't fit with 40k very well at all.

Its a big Universe, and much of it ISN'T controlled by the Imperium...

Regardless of the internal motivation of GW to release Tau (this was hotly debated when they appeared, and many like you Kreedo initially took a strong stance against them, at least in my gaming circles) I thought it was a bold move and added some much needed variety to the game.

I also hoped it might herald a tradition of an occassional totally new army... Oh well...

If anything GW has moved to make the game smaller and smaller in scope (most likely to maximize profits, afte rall SM of all variety sell), and thus the current state of 40K: endless games of Gk vs. Blood Angels.

A diverse and thematic SOB codex could really be a big seller if it spearheaded the launch of an exciting and quality new plastics line for SOB. I fear however that GW plans to rather sell off what metal SOB they still have warehoused and/or convince those willing to build the army that finecasts of the old stuff is adequate.

Time will tell...

Cheddah wrote:

CT GAMER wrote:

Kreedos wrote:


However, I think TAU don't fit with 40k very well at all.

Its a big Universe, and much of it ISN'T controlled by the Imperium...

Regardless of the internal motivation of GW to release Tau (this was hotly debated when they appeared, and many like you Kreedo initially took a strong stance against them, at least in my gaming circles) I thought it was a bold move and added some much needed variety to the game.

I also hoped it might herald a tradition of an occassional totally new army... Oh well...

If anything GW has moved to make the game smaller and smaller in scope (most likely to maximize profits, afte rall SM of all variety sell), and thus the current state of 40K: endless games of Gk vs. Blood Angels.

A diverse and thematic SOB codex could really be a big seller if it spearheaded the launch of an exciting and quality new plastics line for SOB. I fear however that GW plans to rather sell off what metal SOB they still have warehoused and/or convince those willing to build the army that finecasts of the old stuff is adequate.

Time will tell...

Well said.

Melissia wrote:

Kreedos wrote:Most people are saying it can't be played

You can keep making things up which aren't true all ya want, but they're still not true.

Cofessor Dallax wrote:Also agree. This stinks of a 'real world' business decision to get rid of stock...

Eumerin wrote:

Cofessor Dallax wrote:Also agree. This stinks of a 'real world' business decision to get rid of stock...

Why do people keep claiming this when the evidence proves otherwise?

If GW wanted to get rid of stock, then they'd price it to move and they'd make it easy to get. Currently Sisters are the single most expensive figures to purchase by a fairly wide margin. And they're the most difficult army to collect because everything needs to be ordered - and can only be ordered through GW's website or a GW store. You can't get them at all at your local non-GW FLGS, and your local GW store doesn't have them sitting on the rack if you just happen to drop in.

While GW hasn't made it's rationale behind the release of the Sisters WD 'dex clear, it's pretty obvious that clearing out their old metal stock of Sisters figures is not one of the reasons for doing so. Otherwise, GW would have taken steps to make it easier and less expensive to purchase the figures.

ShumaGorath wrote:

Try swaping that multi melta for a missile launcher. But the number I got for the sisters was from Kreedo's list a few pages back 220 for a melta, a combi melta and missile seems pretty close to 195 for a melta and Heavy Flamer. I promised I wasn't gonna do misery poker, but seriously, nilla marines aren't that bad and the only reason the "optimal" build is 25% more is because of all the extra options.

The melta and missile cost the same and you're not firing either one very effectively without vulkan in there (i will never stoop that low!).

You're paying more for the heavy flamer which is a good weapon. Cut that out and just throw on a combi and you're dropping points while equaling out to the damage output of the marine squad. Even if I drop the fist you're still hovering at 25% less. You pay less for more firepower at short range, but you also pay less for worse assault stats (somewhat irrelevant when compared to tacs since they fold like lawn chairs) and the lack of ATSKNF (the sisters faith power works similarly). While not having access to long range heavy weapons.

It's a tradeoff, but it's one that I would enjoy given what is in my experience the total irrelevance of the strength and toughness of a tactical marine in the face of triple hammer handing grey knights, battlecanons, ork boy squads (where atsknf is damning), splinter canons, thunderhammers, etc. I'd rather have focused and directed anti horde/mech firepower on a cheap, mobile platform backed up by an army that sports considerable close range anti mech then I would an overcosted mixed weapon squad that is a jack of all trades and terrible at every one. The sister is no grey hunter or ork boy, but it's a good solid troops choice in the current game. It's telling that so many sisters players are somehow identifying the core troop as the lists weakness.

Kreedos wrote:It sucks yes, however marines don't have Exorcists. Also their scouts suck ours rock the boat with 4x special, have a BS 4 and 3+ save.

Kreedos wrote:It sucks yes, however marines don't have Exorcists. Also their scouts suck ours rock the boat with 4x special, have a BS 4 and 3+ save.

Basically marines don't have access to anything really like the two or three units that ultimately win Sisters games.

Sisters have all of the tools they need to do their job, and they'll still excel at what they do best, melta and flamer.

The melta and missile cost the same and you're not firing either one very effectively without vulkan in there (i will never stoop that low!).

You're paying more for the heavy flamer which is a good weapon. Cut that out and just throw on a combi and you're dropping points while equaling out to the damage output of the marine squad. Even if I drop the fist you're still hovering at 25% less. You pay less for more firepower at short range, but you also pay less for worse assault stats (somewhat irrelevant when compared to tacs since they fold like lawn chairs) and the lack of ATSKNF (the sisters faith power works similarly). While not having access to long range heavy weapons.

It's a tradeoff, but it's one that I would enjoy given what is in my experience the total irrelevance of the strength and toughness of a tactical marine in the face of triple hammer handing grey knights, battlecanons, ork boy squads (where atsknf is damning), splinter canons, thunderhammers, etc. I'd rather have focused and directed anti horde/mech firepower on a cheap, mobile platform backed up by an army that sports considerable close range anti mech then I would an overcosted mixed weapon squad that is a jack of all trades and terrible at every one. The sister is no grey hunter or ork boy, but it's a good solid troops choice in the current game. It's telling that so many sisters players are somehow identifying the core troop as the lists weakness.

Kreedos wrote:I like how you think my post was about you, like I trying to quote you or something.

Kreedos wrote:It sucks yes, however marines don't have Exorcists.

Kreedos wrote:Also their scouts suck ours rock the boat with 4x special, have a BS 4 and 3+ save.

Kreedos wrote:Basically marines don't have access to anything really like the two or three units that ultimately win Sisters games.

Kreedos wrote:Sisters have all of the tools they need to do their job, and they'll still excel at what they do best, melta and flamer.

Kreedos wrote:The Jacobs death cult is an amazingly good unit and it's not overpriced, talking 275 for a squad of 10 deathcult/crusaders + Jacobs in a Rhino

Kreedos wrote:Try out a game with them before you shelf them guys, trust me on this.

ShumaGorath wrote:It's a tradeoff, but it's one that I would enjoy given what is in my experience the total irrelevance of the strength and toughness of a tactical marine in the face of triple hammer handing grey knights, battlecanons, ork boy squads (where atsknf is damning), splinter canons, thunderhammers, etc. I'd rather have focused and directed anti horde/mech firepower on a cheap, mobile platform backed up by an army that sports considerable close range anti mech then I would an overcosted mixed weapon squad that is a jack of all trades and terrible at every one. The sister is no grey hunter or ork boy, but it's a good solid troops choice in the current game. It's telling that so many sisters players are somehow identifying the core troop as the lists weakness.

JB_Man wrote:Can Seraphim fire their twin hand flamers independently, now, too? Because that would be silly. In a good way. Given their ridiculously low points cost, I'm tempted to just field 3 maxed squads with flamers. Despite all of my complaints, there are a few good things about this release.

Some of us arent interested in running an army that only has, basically, a playtest list. Not willing to invest any more models into that.

Melissia wrote:Are the melta pistols still AP2?

Melissia wrote:Are the melta pistols still AP2?

JB_Man wrote:Probably. I never understood the point of the melta pistols to be frank. I'd rather just use the rollin'-600-dice-bahaha-burn-baby-burn flamers for only 5 points and leave the tank killing to my exorcists and dominions or whatever.

Tabitha wrote:Or you can like, you know, bitch.

Melissia wrote:

Kreedos wrote:I like how you think my post was about you, like I trying to quote you or something.

I wasn't. You're still making crap up.

Kreedos wrote:It sucks yes, however marines don't have Exorcists.

Marines have better vehicles than Exorcists.

Kreedos wrote:Also their scouts suck ours rock the boat with 4x special, have a BS 4 and 3+ save.

And Sternguard are better still, so are terminators-- what's your point? SM Scouts and SoB Dominions don't hold the same purpose, trying to force Scouts to do the same job Dominions do is proof that you don't understand how to play C:SM.

Kreedos wrote:Basically marines don't have access to anything really like the two or three units that ultimately win Sisters games.

Yes they do, and more, and BETTER.

Kreedos wrote:Sisters have all of the tools they need to do their job, and they'll still excel at what they do best, melta and flamer.

And Marines can do it better. So can Guard

Melissia wrote:

Tabitha wrote:Or you can like, you know, bitch.

Or you can stop insulting people for complaining about something that is horrible?

For my part, I've already done the ideas thing.

Mythal wrote:
The Hand Flamers are S3 AP6, and you're a factor of four out on the cost of upgrading a Seraphim to wield them. The Inferno Pistols cost half as much again. Statistically, the Hand Flamers are better against GEQ and Orks (if their Act of Faith triggers, which it should given the Seraphim special rules), and the Inferno Pistols are better against MEQ.

JB_Man wrote:My bad, I was going by the old flamer cost, have they increased? And I missed the nerf to the strength and ap...that kind of blows. I'm still not convinced that I want to pay for the inferno pistols, but I'm moving in that direction for at least 1 squad...

Mythal wrote:

JB_Man wrote:My bad, I was going by the old flamer cost, have they increased? And I missed the nerf to the strength and ap...that kind of blows. I'm still not convinced that I want to pay for the inferno pistols, but I'm moving in that direction for at least 1 squad...

I admit, I was surprised at the Hand Flamer price tag (I was less surprised at the Inferno Pistols). You could always go with Hand Flamers for two Seraphim squads, then load out on Meltas in a Dominion squad for your third FA slot. The Meltas will generally benefit more from the Dominion's AoF (twin-linking) than the Seraphim's (rerolling wounds).

Tabitha wrote:Send him a letter with your idea's then. You cant expect them to sift through a bunch of forums trying to find what people think would make their codex better.

Kreedos wrote:

CT GAMER wrote:
The sexualized nature (or degree of) of SOB models is something that is lobg debated and discussed. Some people want half naked D-cupped SOB. Those are the types that I always was happy didn't take up the army tbh...

Those types of people, now most likely play TAU, the anime army.

JB_Man wrote:

Mythal wrote:

JB_Man wrote:

I do love the thought of 30 Seraphim screaming around the board, though.

Amen to that my brother! 15 points each... I swear the writer chap was smoking crack when he came up with the points values... 12 points for a basic sister vs 15 for a seraphim. I'm not complaining

Reply by: Melissia - click to view full reply 

29408

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/27 15:47:48

Post by: Melissia

Backfire wrote:

Kreedos wrote:

CT GAMER wrote:
The sexualized nature (or degree of) of SOB models is something that is lobg debated and discussed. Some people want half naked D-cupped SOB. Those are the types that I always was happy didn't take up the army tbh...

Those types of people, now most likely play TAU, the anime army.

You mistyped 'Eldar' there.

If Tau were as anime-based as people claim, the army would be filled with scantily clad, skinny ladies with huge swords or guns.

Don't forget taht everyone would be from a middle/high school!

Reply by: AllistorPreist - click to view full reply 

43761

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/27 16:20:43

Post by: AllistorPreist

Kreedos wrote:It sucks yes, however marines don't have Exorcists. Also their scouts suck ours rock the boat with 4x special, have a BS 4 and 3+ save.

Basically marines don't have access to anything really like the two or three units that ultimately win Sisters games.

Sisters have all of the tools they need to do their job, and they'll still excel at what they do best, melta and flamer.

Thank you for also ignoring my point. But:

A las cannon predator is very much like an excorcist, but more reliable.
A multimelta equipped land speeder squad is (according to your list earlier) cheaper than 5 dominions in a melta-immolator.
The Stern Guard vets, while pricey, can pack 2 meltas and get special bolter ammo to boot.
And an Honor Guard (IIRC) can pack in melta guns, power weapons or even power fists.

But again not my point. My point was that there aren't a bunch of sisters players sitting around refusing to even try the new dex.

carmachu wrote:Automatically Appended Next Post:

Kreedos wrote:Try out a game with them before you shelf them guys, trust me on this.

Some of us arent interested in running an army that only has, basically, a playtest list. Not willing to invest any more models into that.

OK, way to prove me wrong there... Is my game shop open yet?

Reply by: Mythal - click to view full reply 

46877

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/27 16:21:15

Post by: Mythal

One amusing thing I only now realised. The only infantry model capable of inflicting instant death in assault on a T4 enemy in the new Codex is the Mistress of Repentance, courtesy of the new Wargear entry for the Neural Whip.

Reply by: JB_Man - click to view full reply 

40285

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/27 16:27:37

Post by: JB_Man

Mythal wrote:One amusing thing I only now realised. The only infantry model capable of inflicting instant death in assault on a T4 enemy in the new Codex is the Mistress of Repentance, courtesy of the new Wargear entry for the Neural Whip.

Silly.

Reply by: Sheck2 - click to view full reply 

23451

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/27 16:27:41

Post by: Sheck2

Celtic Strike wrote:Still, either way, they're the biggest boys on the block when it comes to miniature games in US, Europe and Canada and that's nothing to ignore. They're not stupid, I know GW bashing is really popular but they wouldn't still be around if they are all run by the slowed monkeys wearing boxing gloves like the message boards screech that they are.

The issue is not how big of a fish they are in their little bowl, but that their bowl is shrinking as compared to the larger ocean...the 'market' for tabletop war, sci-fi, western, horror, etc. games that use some sort of minauture as part of the game has been growing 5%-10% a year. (This was based on research for a toy client 3 years ago). And GW has been shrinking in that period. They were the premier company in a growth market and now the cash cow whose worth is measured in it's parts.

Reply by: Mythal - click to view full reply 

46877

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/27 16:37:51

Post by: Mythal

JB_Man wrote:

Mythal wrote:One amusing thing I only now realised. The only infantry model capable of inflicting instant death in assault on a T4 enemy in the new Codex is the Mistress of Repentance, courtesy of the new Wargear entry for the Neural Whip.

Silly.

I know - and she dual-wields for 4 power weapon attacks on a charge, and strikes at I3, too.

Reply by: ceorron - click to view full reply 

23704

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/27 16:45:00

Post by: ceorron

Having now constucted a list out of the book I'm feeling more content now that the Sisters with the right choices taken will preform admirably on the battlefield. Actually considering I think Seraphims may have got the biggest buff and are actually very fieldable.

Reply by: Melissia - click to view full reply 

29408

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/27 16:46:49

Post by: Melissia

She also strikes at essentially S8 against T10 against most HQ units.

So against an Ork horde, she wounds on a 6+ until their numbers are down to less than ten.

Reply by: Mythal - click to view full reply 

46877

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/27 16:48:34

Post by: Mythal

Melissia wrote:She also strikes at essentially S8 against T10 against most HQ units.

And all Necrons and Daemons, and most Nids. The irony is palpable

Reply by: ceorron - click to view full reply 

23704

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/27 16:49:46

Post by: ceorron

Mythal wrote:

Melissia wrote:She also strikes at essentially S8 against T10 against most HQ units.

And all Necrons and Daemons, and most Nids. The irony is palpable

Don't forget orks that as the Mob rule would no doubt be in effect.

Reply by: Melissia - click to view full reply 

29408

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/27 16:52:54

Post by: Melissia

Hell, even against Guardsmen and Marines she basically just strikes at S4.

Actually striking at S4 would have been better than striking at Ld8 against the enemy's leadership value.

Reply by: Mythal - click to view full reply 

46877

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/27 16:57:37

Post by: Mythal

Melissia wrote:Hell, even against Guardsmen and Marines she basically just strikes at S4.

Actually striking at S4 would have been better than striking at Ld8 against the enemy's leadership value.

Oh, agreed. I suspect this is one of those Internet Communication Failure things. If an Englishman says something is 'funny', he generally doesn't mean something is 'good', unless he's explicitly discussing stand-up comedy. I find it ironic, which on this side of the pond is largely synonymous with funny as a function of the base level of cultural melancholy, that where once several units could use the Faith system to strike at S8, now the only model who can has a special rule that largely renders the ability moot.

Reply by: Melissia - click to view full reply 

29408

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/27 17:00:14

Post by: Melissia

Oh no, I was agreeing with you.

Reply by: Leo_the_Rat - click to view full reply 

27903

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/27 17:01:39

Post by: Leo_the_Rat

Actually the whip strikes against "the opponent's unmodified Leadership characteristic" (emphasis added). So against a unit of 25 Orks she still attacks vs their statline and not their fearless number. Same with Nids, against a unit of hive guards within synapse range of a synapse creature she rolls Str 8 v Ld 7 not Ld 10.

Reply by: Melissia - click to view full reply 

29408

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/27 17:02:35

Post by: Melissia

Leo_the_Rat wrote:Actually the whip strikes against "the opponent's unmodified Leadership characteristic" (emphasis added). So against a unit of 25 Orks she still attacks vs their statline and not their fearless number. Same with Nids, against a unit of hive guards within synapse range of a synapse creature she rolls Str 8 v Ld 7 not Ld 10.

Oh goddamnit, it opened up the old "what is modified versus unmodified" debate.

Reply by: Leo_the_Rat - click to view full reply 

27903

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/27 17:14:41

Post by: Leo_the_Rat

I would think that that is very apparent. What is the number in the Stat line after/under Ld? That would be the unmodified leadership characteristic. To me the key words are unmodified and characteristic in this instance.
I was/am unaware of any controversy regarding this issue so please forgive me if I seem naive.

Reply by: Kingsley - click to view full reply 

3933

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/27 17:25:29

Post by: Kingsley

AllistorPreist wrote:A las cannon predator is very much like an excorcist, but more reliable.

Uh, no? A tri-lascannon predator costs substantially more than an Exorcist, is extremely hampered if it ever has to move, and has worse power to boot against most targets (Strength 8 AP 1 is better than Strength 9 AP 2 against AV 10-12). The Exorcist is a much, much stronger choice.

Reply by: Melissia - click to view full reply 

29408

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/27 17:28:01

Post by: Melissia

Leo_the_Rat wrote:I would think that that is very apparent.

Apparently you've never seen someone get into an argument about the Book of St. Lucius, then (which, despite its very plain and simply written rules which should need no explanation, still gets some people riled up)

Reply by: Mythal - click to view full reply 

46877

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/27 17:34:27

Post by: Mythal

Melissia wrote:Apparently you've never seen someone get into an argument about the Book of St. Lucius, then (which, despite its very plain and simply written rules which should need no explanation, still gets some people riled up)

Ah, yes - the good old 'may != must' argument. If I'm honest, that's the thing that irritates me most about the new Codex - the fact that the faith of a common and garden Battle Sister is strong enough to rally against impossible odds in the name of Him On Earth, but if she's a Seraphim, a Dominion or a Retributor, her zeal is replaced by a magnetic field that drags her armour towards the table edge as fast as she can cheese it. I tend to take the view that all squads with an Act should have, included within that act, the ability to regroup on a successful AoF check during the movement phase.

Reply by: Melissia - click to view full reply 

29408

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/27 17:41:22

Post by: Melissia

Not just that, but it incited arguments on what exactly unmodified meant. Because to some people, the option to use the canoness' unmodified leadership effectively modified the leadership values of the squads that used it.

Nevermind the pissed off Culexis assassin owners.

Reply by: Kid_Kyoto - click to view full reply 

518

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/27 17:43:50

Post by: Kid_Kyoto

Melissia wrote:She also strikes at essentially S8 against T10 against most HQ units.

So against an Ork horde, she wounds on a 6+ until their numbers are down to less than ten.

She would synergize will the psychic battle squad, just buy one through your IG all-

Oh, never mind.

Reply by: Reecius - click to view full reply 

2776

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/27 17:51:43

Post by: Reecius

Did anyone else notice there are no psychic hoods? Or any psychic defenses......for witch hunters?

Did I miss it or is that legit? WTF?

Seraphim and Dominions are amazing, but a lot of the units are whatever. Celestians have no purpose that I can see. You can make them weak assault units if you buff them and give them HQ support. Yay.

St. Celetian is pretty awesome for her points.

Repentia don't look so great.

Why in blazes is the immolator so expensive?

Penitent engines look pretty cool for the points, they are super cheap, but since the Exorcist is the only long range weapon that can punch tanks that you can take now, I can't imagine most lists won't take at least 2.

12 point battle sisters is pretty good. I think they will make solid troops.

On the whole, I think the book has some cool units but is a net loss for Sisters players.

I give this book a big meh. We'll see how it plays on the table but it sure isn't exciting on paper.

Reply by: Melissia - click to view full reply 

29408

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/27 17:54:09

Post by: Melissia

Penitent Engines can be tar-pitted by a grot squad.

Reply by: streamdragon - click to view full reply 

27151

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/27 17:59:39

Post by: streamdragon

Mythal wrote:

streamdragon wrote:I'm not denying it can function; just whether or not I plan to bother with it.

Which is a perfectly understandable viewpoint, and I apologise if you took any affront from my post My response was more directed at the poster who thought those trying out the new Codex honestly believed it was superior.

Not at all!

Stopped by my GW to grab the second half of the Sister's "book" (because I apparently hate myself, who knows). To be honest, all it really did was solidify my decision to buy White Dwarf as little as possible.

The stark contrast between the Ogre Kingdoms/Tomb Kings battle report and the Sisters/Tyranids battle report is staggering. OK/TK features full lists, vivid turn by turn details and victory point tallies; it covers 19 pages. The Sisters/Tyranids battle doesn't have lists, lumps the game into 2 turn blocks (i.e., Turn 1-2, Turn 3-4, Turn 5-6) and takes 7 pages. Considering this isn't even the Ogre Kingdoms full release, while it is our "final half" of whatever...

I want to be a bit hyperbolic and say: This should show Sisters players exactly how little GW cares about their army. The problem is, it doesn't feel hyperbolic; it feels true. Here's hoping we live to see a real release I guess.

Reply by: Cofessor Dallax - click to view full reply 

48124

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/27 18:03:33

Post by: Cofessor Dallax

Reecius wrote:Did anyone else notice there are no psychic hoods? Or any psychic defenses......for witch hunters?

Did I miss it or is that legit? WTF?

Seraphim and Dominions are amazing, but a lot of the units are whatever. Celestians have no purpose that I can see. You can make them weak assault units if you buff them and give them HQ support. Yay.

St. Celetian is pretty awesome for her points.

Repentia don't look so great.

Why in blazes is the immolator so expensive?

Penitent engines look pretty cool for the points, they are super cheap, but since the Exorcist is the only long range weapon that can punch tanks that you can take now, I can't imagine most lists won't take at least 2.

12 point battle sisters is pretty good. I think they will make solid troops.

On the whole, I think the book has some cool units but is a net loss for Sisters players.

I give this book a big meh. We'll see how it plays on the table but it sure isn't exciting on paper.

Anti-psyker-wse we now get the wonderful Condemnor boltgun... What are you moaning about? lol
Celestians are the new Inquisitor retinue kitted out for combat, i.e. useless
St. Celestine is absolutely AWESOME for her points cost
Repentia don't look great, but play a few games with them and I think you'll change your mind, really
Immolators...Angers me... They're razorbacks with re-rolls to wound and that re-roll costs 25 points. Blazes indeed, good pun!

Reply by: Leo_the_Rat - click to view full reply 

27903

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/27 18:31:22

Post by: Leo_the_Rat

A HF immolator cost the exact same amount as an HF razorback and has the exact same rules. So I don't see the 25 point difference between them.

Reply by: streamdragon - click to view full reply 

27151

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/27 18:35:54

Post by: streamdragon

Trying to compare the Immo to a Razorback is strange:

(Immo w/ TL Heavy Bolters + Reroll to wound + 6++) - Razorback w/ TL Heavy Bolters = 25

(Immo w/ TL Heavy Flamers + 6++) - (Razorback w/ TL Heavy Flamers) = 0

buh? So in one case, the reroll to wound and 6++ are worth 25 points. In the second, the 6++ is apparently worth nothing?

GG GW. GG.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Leo_the_Rat wrote:A HF immolator cost the exact same amount as an HF razorback and has the exact same rules. So I don't see the 25 point difference between them.

Not quite the exact same rules. The immo gets a 6++ while the razorback gets searchlights!

Reply by: Cofessor Dallax - click to view full reply 

48124

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/27 18:39:13

Post by: Cofessor Dallax

Aologies, I thought the razorback could take HF for free instead of HB. And I forgot about the 6++ (because if you're like me then it's irrelevant anyway lol)
But still... 65 pts for an Immolator? That's whack

Reply by: streamdragon - click to view full reply 

27151

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/27 18:44:13

Post by: streamdragon

The main difference isn't in the HF Immo/Razor, it's the Heavy Bolter version. I would happily drop the reroll to wound on the heavy bolters if it meant paying 25 points less. (Since apparently the 6++ doesn't count against cost, or is worth the 1 point that searchlights are worth. )


6++ isn't going to be anything to be relied on, no doubt. Will it save some Battle Sisters from the occasional AP3 template, sure. Will you really even notice it's there in most games? Probably not.

Reply by: Eremiel - click to view full reply 

48181

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/27 18:52:20

Post by: Eremiel

Melissia wrote:Are the melta pistols still AP2?

No.


They are AP1


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Mythal wrote:One amusing thing I only now realised. The only infantry model capable of inflicting instant death in assault on a T4 enemy in the new Codex is the Mistress of Repentance, courtesy of the new Wargear entry for the Neural Whip.

Except you're testing against their Ld....sooooo 4+ if they have a crappy Ld. 5+ ---> 6+ if it's something near a character type

Reply by: Cofessor Dallax - click to view full reply 

48124

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/27 19:15:17

Post by: Cofessor Dallax

streamdragon wrote:
6++ isn't going to be anything to be relied on, no doubt. Will it save some Battle Sisters from the occasional AP3 template, sure. Will you really even notice it's there in most games? Probably not.

I've polayed 3 games using the new rules so far and the times I've remembered to roll the ++ save I've failed. Most of the time I just plain forgot to roll for it lol

Reply by: CT GAMER - click to view full reply 

14152

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/27 19:24:32

Post by: CT GAMER

Tabitha wrote:You cant expect them to sift through a bunch of forums trying to find what people think would make their codex better.

IF you don't think people involved with game/codex design don't read forums/threads like this then you are an idiot.

They are never going to admit it, nor identify themselves in a public forum, but they certainly take advantage of thread like this to gauge opinion, etc.

Reply by: Backfire - click to view full reply 

15717

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/27 19:47:18

Post by: Backfire

Reecius wrote:Did anyone else notice there are no psychic hoods? Or any psychic defenses......for witch hunters?

Did I miss it or is that legit? WTF?

I think the point is that they're no longer "Witch Hunters". (They probably should have never been.)

Looking at the Codex, I can see why Sisters players are upset...there are lots of simplifications and obviously with entire Inquisition connection left out, lot less units to choose from. In some ways they almost seem like "Blood Angels Lite".

OTOH, I don't think the army is "weak", it just seems bit bland and barebones.

Reply by: 1hadhq - click to view full reply 

6838

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/27 19:58:53

Post by: 1hadhq

Tabitha wrote: but maybe you might help change the future hard back codex for the better.

Plastic sisters are coming before next summer.

A move to hard back made before 6th or at 6th ed?

Reply by: Alpharius - click to view full reply 

123

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/27 20:16:39

Post by: Alpharius

I hope we do NOT get hard cover Codices - $40+ for an army book?

Ouch!

Reply by: Grenat - click to view full reply 

41688

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/27 20:47:14

Post by: Grenat

OTOH, I don't think the army is "weak", it just seems bit bland and barebones.

That's my point too !

Reply by: Reecius - click to view full reply 

2776

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/27 20:49:51

Post by: Reecius

Hard back codex = PDF down loads.

This looks like a pretty weak effort, to me.

And you can tarpit Penitent Engines with grots? How? They will kill a few of them and run them down. Am I missing a rule?

I think a good list will consist of Exorcists as now, maxed fast attack with a mix of both types of units, St. Super Sista and a bunch of sisters squads.

The immolator is overcosted because the Razorback with heavy flamers is stupidly overpriced, too! Haha. And then to give it heavy bolters makes it dumb expensive.

I agree that this book isn't weak, just boring. Hopefully they are just waiting to wow us with the full version of the book because for now, if I played Sisters, I would want my old dex over this thing.

And no Pyschic Defense = Fail.

Give this thing to Mat Ward, every Sisters vehicle will have SISTER POWER! which ignores all damage results and forces any male models in the other players army to sit and stare at the girls, doing nothing for a turn, possibly hitting their own guys, on a 2+.

And it will only cost 5 points.

Reply by: Grenat - click to view full reply 

41688

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/27 20:55:20

Post by: Grenat

forces any male models in the other players army to sit and stare at the girls, doing nothing for a turn, possibly hitting their own guys, on a 2+.

That's pretty Slaaneshi, especially considering the MEQ environnement

Reply by: Reecius - click to view full reply 

2776

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/27 21:27:43

Post by: Reecius

Hahaha, very true!

So on a 2+ they have impure thoughts about Nuns and instead of fighting, flagellate themselves as penance.....all for only 5 points!


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And another thing.

10 Sisters with 2 meltas in a rhino=180 points
10 grey hunters with 2 meltas in a Rhino=190 points

The grey hunters are pretty clearly superior, but it isn't crazy out of line. I think they sisters should be a little cheaper but not bad.

Grey Hunters are undercosted though.

Reply by: Grenat - click to view full reply 

41688

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/27 22:35:39

Post by: Grenat

I was ready to pay more for my sisters, if only the codex could give them some particularity. I am uneasy with BSS just to be a Ten-Power-armor squad with 2 melta. I could have use some more specificity with the Holy Tryptic, bolter-flamer-melta... because most armies are already based on the bolter/melta...
And so on..

Reply by: Reecius - click to view full reply 

2776

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/27 22:38:52

Post by: Reecius

That's a good point. They are just IG vets in power armor. The act of faith mechanic is cool, but they could have gotten some unique stuff.

Well, here's to hoping that the actual codex and Jes Goodwin minis make up for the wait.

And dear God Emperor, please don't let Mat Ward near the codex!

Reply by: Mythal - click to view full reply 

46877

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/27 23:04:33

Post by: Mythal

Reecius wrote:And dear God Emperor, please don't let Mat Ward near the codex!

You're kidding, right? Imagine how awesome it would be if Mat Ward handled the full SoB Codex - they'd have a special rule for Apocalypse games whereby sacrificing all of your Sisters of Battle granted all surviving models immunity to daemonic effects for the duration of the battle!

But in all seriousness, at least Mr Ward writes interesting crunch. Avoiding his fluff, which is the subject of much controversial debate, he's never turned in a 40k Codex that's made me think "Wow, this army is going to suck on the tabletop". Whether or not he's the right 'fit' for the Sisters in terms of keeping their flavour, that's up in the air, but I would certainly prefer him to write it than Cruddace Codex 2.0. All of the rumours I've read online seemed to indicate Phil Kelly was handling the alleged bookdex in any case - I say alleged, because it helps me keep from getting my hopes up, rather than because I doubt the integrity of any of the kind people providing said rumours.

Reply by: SabrX - click to view full reply 

10387

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/27 23:09:09

Post by: SabrX

Reecius wrote:

Give this thing to Mat Ward, every Sisters vehicle will have SISTER POWER! which ignores all damage results and forces any male models in the other players army to sit and stare at the girls, doing nothing for a turn, possibly hitting their own guys, on a 2+.

*chuckles*

That would be an awesome rule, but I wonder how it work against slaanesh or tyranid models.

Reply by: Reecius - click to view full reply 

2776

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/27 23:11:19

Post by: Reecius

@Sabrx
Hentai! Yuck! hahaha

@Mythal
He writes incredibly overpowered books. Daemons damn near ruined Fantasy and Grey Knights are OTT for 40K. If you are a casual gamer, it may not seem like such a big deal to you, but for tournament gaming, his books suck...all apart from Space Marines which were amazing. He blew his creative wad on that book, the rest is mostly crap.

Reply by: Mythal - click to view full reply 

46877

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/27 23:18:17

Post by: Mythal

Reecius wrote:@Mythal
He writes incredibly overpowered books. Daemons damn near ruined Fantasy and Grey Knights are OTT for 40K. If you are a casual gamer, it may not seem like such a big deal to you, but for tournament gaming, his books suck...all apart from Space Marines which were amazing. He blew his creative wad on that book, the rest is mostly crap.

So, if he writes the Codex, Sisters of Battle could go from this White Dwarf pamphlet to a horrifically overpowered army that oozes special rules, flying assault transports and cheese?

Bugger. Better hope that doesn't happen. Yessirree, Bob. Definitely no hoping for Mat Ward-style crunch. Nope, not here.

But taking your point, I would rather the Sisters book were balanced, innovatively represented (both in terms of models and flavoured rules) and versatile in terms of multiple competitive builds.

Reply by: Reecius - click to view full reply 

2776

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/27 23:40:16

Post by: Reecius

You said it! That is what we hope for in every codex.

Not blood missile shooting blood bat riding blood marines in their blood bloods!

And Grey Knights, good lord, Mat Ward must not play the game if he thinks that book was balanced in any way.

Reply by: ph34r - click to view full reply 

11

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/27 23:45:26

Post by: ph34r

Alpharius wrote:I hope we do NOT get hard cover Codices - $40+ for an army book?

Ouch!

Have you actually handled one of the hardcover books? It's only $8 more than our currently ridiculous $33 soft cover prices, and in return the books are actually full color and nice looking.

Reply by: Pouncey - click to view full reply 

43778

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/28 00:45:36

Post by: Pouncey

Mythal wrote:

Reecius wrote:@Mythal
He writes incredibly overpowered books. Daemons damn near ruined Fantasy and Grey Knights are OTT for 40K. If you are a casual gamer, it may not seem like such a big deal to you, but for tournament gaming, his books suck...all apart from Space Marines which were amazing. He blew his creative wad on that book, the rest is mostly crap.

So, if he writes the Codex, Sisters of Battle could go from this White Dwarf pamphlet to a horrifically overpowered army that oozes special rules, flying assault transports and cheese?

Bugger. Better hope that doesn't happen. Yessirree, Bob. Definitely no hoping for Mat Ward-style crunch. Nope, not here.

But taking your point, I would rather the Sisters book were balanced, innovatively represented (both in terms of models and flavoured rules) and versatile in terms of multiple competitive builds.

That last sentence is what I'm hoping for. Mainly because I want to feel special for playing the "boobs" army, and not come to Dakka and "have to" read threads whining about how Sisters are everywhere and so hard to beat and on and on and on, and then I'd get lumped in with them. I prefer balanced to overpowered, even - dare I say especially? - when it's the army I'm currently playing. I don't want to be overpowered, because then I'd have to share with the powergamers and have to defend myself by saying, "I just like the minis and the fluff, I didn't start Sisters to win a lot," and would have to deal with Sisters-hate-bandwagoners. At least for several months, until most people figure out how to deal with Sisters armies, and FAQs get released, and all returns to normal. Yeah, I care what strangers online think of me and think of the faction I play in a tabletop game with little plastic and metal mans and womans.

And I'm really looking forward to whenever Jes' plastic multi-part Sisters get released. Can't wait - but I will (it's just an expression) - to see plastic Battle Sisters. ^_^ Love plastic minis, because I dislike when superglue gets on my fingers, plastic on plastic joins fall apart much less often, and I like painting plastic minis more than metal ones, because the paint sticks better. My metal scout snipers from 2003 looked like they'd been drybrushed a metallic color after a few months. My Sisters have held up better, with the odd chip here and there. Probably doing something wrong with my Scouts. Sorry for the tangent.

Reply by: Necrosis - click to view full reply 

24696

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/28 00:53:42

Post by: Necrosis

Reecius wrote:
He writes incredibly overpowered books. Daemons damn near ruined Fantasy and Grey Knights are OTT for 40K. If you are a casual gamer, it may not seem like such a big deal to you, but for tournament gaming, his books suck...all apart from Space Marines which were amazing. He blew his creative wad on that book, the rest is mostly crap.

You know what books matt ward didn't write? Imperial Guard and Space Wolves which are considered the strongest armies.

Reply by: Dysartes - click to view full reply 

21358

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/28 01:15:20

Post by: Dysartes

Reecius wrote:If you are a casual gamer, it may not seem like such a big deal to you, but for tournament gaming, his books suck...

So, they're designed properly, then?

After all, GW seem to have stopped supporting tournaments - maybe his books are meant to be a hint to those of you who just won't let them go?

Reply by: Eremiel - click to view full reply 

48181

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/28 01:26:57

Post by: Eremiel

I'd like to see some additional long range support. And allowing us to use the Repressor (which Forge World still says is mostly ours) Imagine 6 (Even though WD lists it as 10...) firing points AND a HFlamer...

Reply by: Reecius - click to view full reply 

2776

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/28 01:30:45

Post by: Reecius

@Necrosis

Fair play. Grey Knights are the best army in the game right now though, followed by Wolves, Dark Eldar, IG and Blood Angels. That is of course debatable, but that is the general consensus among tournament players. I stay very, very dialed into the tournament meta and data shows us Grey Knights have just exploded past the crowd. The winner of the NOVA invitational tournament was a Grey Knights who smashed Space Wolves, and they are doing great in the championships so far.

They also won an inordinate amount of Ard Boyz games, far out of proportion with the rest of the field.

The player is still what matters, it's just that Grey Knights are a bit over the top and it aggravates me.

@Dysartes

If you don't like tournament play that is fine. Check out the live coverage of the NOVA and Adepticon though to see how fun and cool those events are and how much community they build, but your preference is your own.

The thing with Grey Knights, which makes it a poorly designed book, is how it breaks the game for a lot of armies.

Daemons can literally find themselves in a position where they can't even put models on the table. That isn't fun.

Horde armies can lose huge chunks of their armies to Purifiers with no way to stop it. Not fun.

Some of their psychic powers can damn near win games alone.

Don't even get me started on the grenades.

Psyfilmen are crazy undercosted.

and the list goes on.

And why would GW hint to anyone that playing competitively is not what they want you to do? You do realize that is completely illogical, right? GW exists to sell models, as they have openly stated on several occasions. Tournament gamers buy loads of them. GW doesn't want to alienate any portion of their customer base, that would be foolish.

And writing a bad codex to make a point? Again, illogical. That is cutting off your nose to spite your face.

At any rate, I respect the way anyone chooses to play the game, or even just to paint the models. That is a personal choice.

Writing good, balanced rules only benefits everyone, that should be pretty obvious. It keeps the game healthy, strong and fun for all types of players.

Do you guys play fantasy?

Daemons in Fantasy were so over powered that they would win tournaments 500 points under the other armies. That's Mat Ward. He also wrote the last Orcs and Goblins books. The worst army in the game.

I could go on, but the guy is not good at his job, IMO.

Reply by: Leo_the_Rat - click to view full reply 

27903

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/28 01:31:21

Post by: Leo_the_Rat

The strangest thing is that an ad for the repressor follows the article. I take it as sort of a "permission to use this" sort of thing.

Reply by: Revarien - click to view full reply 

26489

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/28 01:42:47

Post by: Revarien

Leo_the_Rat wrote:The strangest thing is that an ad for the repressor follows the article. I take it as sort of a "permission to use this" sort of thing.

Ok... Good, I'm glad that I wasn't the only one that thought this was odd, too.

Reply by: paintedpotato - click to view full reply 

9614

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/28 01:58:11

Post by: paintedpotato

Pouncey wrote: I prefer balanced to overpowered, even - dare I say especially? - when it's the army I'm currently playing. I don't want to be overpowered, because then I'd have to share with the powergamers and have to defend myself by saying, "I just like the minis and the fluff, I didn't start Sisters to win a lot," and would have to deal with Sisters-hate-bandwagoners. At least for several months, until most people figure out how to deal with Sisters armies, and FAQs get released, and all returns to normal.

I concur.

Pouncey wrote: And I'm really looking forward to whenever Jes' plastic multi-part Sisters get released. Can't wait - but I will (it's just an expression) - to see plastic Battle Sisters. ^_^ Love plastic minis, because I dislike when superglue gets on my fingers, plastic on plastic joins fall apart much less often, and I like painting plastic minis more than metal ones, because the paint sticks better. My metal scout snipers from 2003 looked like they'd been drybrushed a metallic color after a few months. My Sisters have held up better, with the odd chip here and there. Probably doing something wrong with my Scouts. Sorry for the tangent.

Fleur de lis; they will be everywhere! I can imagine every nut, bolt and stud that are on the current models being replaced by tiny lily emblems. And dynamic dangling chaplets and flowing purity seals. I hope they don't end up looking too busy. Not looking forward to that.

Reply by: Pouncey - click to view full reply 

43778

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/28 02:04:23

Post by: Pouncey

paintedpotato wrote:

Pouncey wrote: I prefer balanced to overpowered, even - dare I say especially? - when it's the army I'm currently playing. I don't want to be overpowered, because then I'd have to share with the powergamers and have to defend myself by saying, "I just like the minis and the fluff, I didn't start Sisters to win a lot," and would have to deal with Sisters-hate-bandwagoners. At least for several months, until most people figure out how to deal with Sisters armies, and FAQs get released, and all returns to normal.

I concur.

Pouncey wrote: And I'm really looking forward to whenever Jes' plastic multi-part Sisters get released. Can't wait - but I will (it's just an expression) - to see plastic Battle Sisters. ^_^ Love plastic minis, because I dislike when superglue gets on my fingers, plastic on plastic joins fall apart much less often, and I like painting plastic minis more than metal ones, because the paint sticks better. My metal scout snipers from 2003 looked like they'd been drybrushed a metallic color after a few months. My Sisters have held up better, with the odd chip here and there. Probably doing something wrong with my Scouts. Sorry for the tangent.

Fleur de lis; they will be everywhere! I can imagine every nut, bolt and stud that are on the current models being replaced by tiny lily emblems. And dynamic dangling chaplets and flowing purity seals. I hope they don't end up looking too busy. Not looking forward to that.

I'm sure Jes won't go overboard with details. He did some damned fine work on Dark Eldar. ^_^

Reply by: RiTides - click to view full reply 

9594

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/28 02:19:35

Post by: RiTides

Reecius wrote:Do you guys play fantasy?

Daemons in Fantasy were so over powered that they would win tournaments 500 points under the other armies. That's Mat Ward. He also wrote the last Orcs and Goblins books. The worst army in the game.

I could go on, but the guy is not good at his job, IMO.

It's true, daemons are just stupid good in fantasy. They won all 3 top spots in the last 'Ard Boyz semifinals near me.

The previous O&G book was insanely bad (albiet, I believe it was a 6th ed book being played in 7th ed). I never lost to them in 7th.

So, agreed... but that's probably not really the topic for this thread.

I do wish GW would go the Privateer Press route and actually change things that are overpowered and broken. They took a step in changing the power scroll (which previously was being banned from most tournaments) but there are some easy fixes they could do to daemons, too, to make them not insane.

Reply by: Reecius - click to view full reply 

2776

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/28 02:40:22

Post by: Reecius

Well said, RiTides, well said.

But you are right, Mat Ward isn't the topic of this thread so I will drop it.

Reply by: Cheddah - click to view full reply 

9296

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/28 07:52:18

Post by: Cheddah

ph34r wrote:

Alpharius wrote:I hope we do NOT get hard cover Codices - $40+ for an army book?

Ouch!

Have you actually handled one of the hardcover books? It's only $8 more than our currently ridiculous $33 soft cover prices, and in return the books are actually full color and nice looking.

It would be much harder to fit in my army case...

Reply by: morgendonner - click to view full reply 

14126

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/28 07:57:41

Post by: morgendonner

So is the issue out yet in the US or what? Have yet to see the actual part 2 anywhere.

Reply by: paintedpotato - click to view full reply 

9614

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/28 07:58:09

Post by: paintedpotato

Cheddah wrote:

ph34r wrote:

Alpharius wrote:I hope we do NOT get hard cover Codices - $40+ for an army book?

Ouch!

Have you actually handled one of the hardcover books? It's only $8 more than our currently ridiculous $33 soft cover prices, and in return the books are actually full color and nice looking.

It would be much harder to fit in my army case...

Oh wow! You actually bring your codex with you?! Most people I know just grab a new copy of the shelf and put it back when they are done. Or just make stuff up off the top of their head.

I applaud you! Unless you just meant that as a pun. Because by definition, it would be harder...

Reply by: ph34r - click to view full reply 

11

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/28 08:20:52

Post by: ph34r

paintedpotato wrote:Oh wow! You actually bring your codex with you?! Most people I know just grab a new copy of the shelf and put it back when they are done. Or just make stuff up off the top of their head.

I applaud you! Unless you just meant that as a pun. Because by definition, it would be harder...

I didn't know there were people who actually thought it widely accepted to not bring their army book/codex with them.

Reply by: Your Friend Doctor Robert - click to view full reply 

41554

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/28 08:45:48

Post by: Your Friend Doctor Robert

My store shrink-wraps the codices so you can't use them off the shelf.

Anyway, I've yet to see a Sisters army being played. Looking forward to meeting them.

Reply by: Tabitha - click to view full reply 

41319

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/28 11:29:56

Post by: Tabitha

Cheddah wrote:

ph34r wrote:

Alpharius wrote:I hope we do NOT get hard cover Codices - $40+ for an army book?

Ouch!

Have you actually handled one of the hardcover books? It's only $8 more than our currently ridiculous $33 soft cover prices, and in return the books are actually full color and nice looking.

It would be much harder to fit in my army case...

Sorry I didnt mean hard back copy. I meant a physical copy of the book. As in not a WD dex.

I was sleep deprived when I wrote that.

Reply by: Eremiel - click to view full reply 

48181

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/28 12:11:52

Post by: Eremiel

Tabitha wrote:

Cheddah wrote:

ph34r wrote:

Alpharius wrote:I hope we do NOT get hard cover Codices - $40+ for an army book?

Ouch!

Have you actually handled one of the hardcover books? It's only $8 more than our currently ridiculous $33 soft cover prices, and in return the books are actually full color and nice looking.

It would be much harder to fit in my army case...

Sorry I didnt mean hard back copy. I meant a physical copy of the book. As in not a WD dex.

I was sleep deprived when I wrote that.

Most likely, I'll be buying a second set of WD issues so I can pull it apart and make copies of each page of our "'dex", use a pamphlet punch and put it in booklet form.

Reply by: Kingsley - click to view full reply 

3933

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/28 12:23:25

Post by: Kingsley

Eremiel wrote:Most likely, I'll be buying a second set of WD issues so I can pull it apart and make copies of each page of our "'dex", use a pamphlet punch and put it in booklet form.

The bad old days return... hopefully we won't see a full return to the days of Chapter Approved, where you often had to have a "WD binder" with the latest rulings and articles for your army in addition to the Codex and rulebook.

Reply by: Radish - click to view full reply 

17835

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/28 12:34:01

Post by: Radish

Is that really that different than the faqs they have now? I'd rather have a living game than one where a broken army dominates everyone for four years and tons of people quit playing like what demons did to Fantasy. Epic Asphyxious had an ability in Warmachine that has been tweaked twice so far since it was dominating games in a way that many people (even people who played him) thought was unfair.

Reply by: Kingsley - click to view full reply 

3933

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/28 13:46:09

Post by: Kingsley

It's very different, since you don't have to buy White Dwarf to get the FAQs. If GW puts this sort of content online, I'd be fine with it-- as it stands, though, it feels like a ploy to get people buying White Dwarf unnecessarily.

Reply by: Scott-S6 - click to view full reply 

13518

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/28 13:57:09

Post by: Scott-S6

paintedpotato wrote:Oh wow! You actually bring your codex with you?! Most people I know just grab a new copy of the shelf and put it back when they are done. Or just make stuff up off the top of their head.

I applaud you!

You would even consider playing against someone that didn't have their codex with them?

Reply by: htj - click to view full reply 

42223

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/28 14:01:13

Post by: htj

Fetterkey wrote:It's very different, since you don't have to buy White Dwarf to get the FAQs. If GW puts this sort of content online, I'd be fine with it-- as it stands, though, it feels like a ploy to get people buying White Dwarf unnecessarily.

They put the BA codex online a month or so after release, so we might see that again here.

Reply by: Pouncey - click to view full reply 

43778

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/28 14:23:34

Post by: Pouncey

Eremiel wrote:

Tabitha wrote:

Cheddah wrote:

ph34r wrote:

Alpharius wrote:I hope we do NOT get hard cover Codices - $40+ for an army book?

Ouch!

Have you actually handled one of the hardcover books? It's only $8 more than our currently ridiculous $33 soft cover prices, and in return the books are actually full color and nice looking.

It would be much harder to fit in my army case...

Sorry I didnt mean hard back copy. I meant a physical copy of the book. As in not a WD dex.

I was sleep deprived when I wrote that.

Most likely, I'll be buying a second set of WD issues so I can pull it apart and make copies of each page of our "'dex", use a pamphlet punch and put it in booklet form.

I did that yesterday, but without tearing my WDs apart. ^_^

Reply by: Pyriel- - click to view full reply 

20650

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/28 16:34:24

Post by: Pyriel-

The thing with Grey Knights, which makes it a poorly designed book, is how it breaks the game for a lot of armies.

lol Tell that to the heresy online crowd.
I was basically laughed out of the board for having the audacity to claim the new GK would change the meta game over there

Reply by: Melissia - click to view full reply 

29408

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/28 16:38:53

Post by: Melissia

Eremiel wrote:

Melissia wrote:Are the melta pistols still AP2?

They are AP1

Hrm. Two S8 AP1 Melta shots, even if it's such a hilariously short range, are at least somewhat worth the 30 points It's still too expensive to use often though...

Reply by: Pyriel- - click to view full reply 

20650

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/28 17:01:38

Post by: Pyriel-

Hrm. Two S8 AP1 Melta shots, even if it's such a hilariously short range, are at least somewhat worth the 30 points It's still too expensive to use often though...

Dunno, think the cost is to steep for those. The squad needs to close in to point blank with whatever they shoot at, most vehicles move either just as fast or faster then they do and it almost always means a one shot weapon before melee.

Reply by: Mythal - click to view full reply 

46877

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/28 17:17:48

Post by: Mythal

Pyriel- wrote:

Hrm. Two S8 AP1 Melta shots, even if it's such a hilariously short range, are at least somewhat worth the 30 points It's still too expensive to use often though...

Dunno, think the cost is to steep for those. The squad needs to close in to point blank with whatever they shoot at, most vehicles move either just as fast or faster then they do and it almost always means a one shot weapon before melee.

Cost is steep, but remember that they're now the only unit in the force capable of getting four melta hits from five models - and for 25 points less than the absolute minimum it cost 3rd Ed Dominions to do the same thing, with a free reroll on their 6++ and Jump Packing. I'll definitely run one five-Seraphim squad with Inferno Pistols alongside St Celestine - she serves up to a point as ablative wounds for the squad, and increases its effectiveness against MEQ/heavy infantry. My other two Fast Attack slots will probably go to small Dominions Squads in MM-Immolators.

Reply by: Cheddah - click to view full reply 

9296

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/28 17:29:34

Post by: Cheddah

Revarien wrote:

Leo_the_Rat wrote:The strangest thing is that an ad for the repressor follows the article. I take it as sort of a "permission to use this" sort of thing.

Ok... Good, I'm glad that I wasn't the only one that thought this was odd, too.

It seems to be part of the Codex article. Note the same "Sisters of Battle" in the top right hand corner of the page?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

paintedpotato wrote:

Cheddah wrote:

ph34r wrote:

Alpharius wrote:I hope we do NOT get hard cover Codices - $40+ for an army book?

Ouch!

Have you actually handled one of the hardcover books? It's only $8 more than our currently ridiculous $33 soft cover prices, and in return the books are actually full color and nice looking.

It would be much harder to fit in my army case...

Oh wow! You actually bring your codex with you?! Most people I know just grab a new copy of the shelf and put it back when they are done. Or just make stuff up off the top of their head.

I applaud you! Unless you just meant that as a pun. Because by definition, it would be harder...

I do bring it with me since I always seem to need a reminder of, or to verify certain rules.

Melissia wrote:

Eremiel wrote:

Melissia wrote:Are the melta pistols still AP2?

They are AP1

Hrm. Two S8 AP1 Melta shots, even if it's such a hilariously short range, are at least somewhat worth the 30 points It's still too expensive to use often though...

Seems to be better to field a dominion squad though. A seraphim with inferno pistols has two melta shots for 30 points, but a dominion squad could have 2 melta shots for 20 points.

Reply by: Evil Lamp 6 - click to view full reply 

29655

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/28 17:42:13

Post by: Evil Lamp 6

Asked in YMDC but would get more attention here, is St. Celestine an IC? First half has it listed in her Special Rules, second half does not. WTF GW?!?

Reply by: Mythal - click to view full reply 

46877

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/28 17:51:01

Post by: Mythal

Evil Lamp 6 wrote:Asked in YMDC but would get more attention here, is St. Celestine an IC?

Yes. Unless an Errata is published changing her Bestiary entry, she is described as having the Independent Character special rule in the document which explicitly replaced Codex: Witch Hunters (whereas the second half merely 'implicitly' does so).

Reply by: Dysartes - click to view full reply 

21358

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/28 18:02:10

Post by: Dysartes

Mythal wrote:

Evil Lamp 6 wrote:Asked in YMDC but would get more attention here, is St. Celestine an IC?

Yes. Unless an Errata is published changing her Bestiary entry, she is described as having the Independent Character special rule in the document which explicitly replaced Codex: Witch Hunters (whereas the second half merely 'implicitly' does so).

How does hat jive with the Arco-Flagellant's statistics, though? Explicitly changed in the besitary, implicitly changed back in the army list...

Reply by: Mythal - click to view full reply 

46877

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/28 18:19:19

Post by: Mythal

Dysartes wrote:How does hat jive with the Arco-Flagellant's statistics, though? Explicitly changed in the besitary, implicitly changed back in the army list...

I would take the Bestiary's stats as gospel for the Arco-Flagellant. Mainly because at 15 points per model, I'd never field one of them in place of a DCA.

As a side-note, even in the Army List her unit type is listed as "Jump Infantry (character)". Compare this to, for example, Mephiston, who is explicitly intended not to be treated as an IC, and thus has the unit type "Infantry" - it certainly implies that the failure to reiterate the Independent Character rule is a typographical error, rather than an intentional nerf.

Reply by: paintedpotato - click to view full reply 

9614

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/28 19:04:18

Post by: paintedpotato

I just wouldn't put Celestine in a squad. Next to one is fine, but joined seems like a bad idea.

Reply by: Mythal - click to view full reply 

46877

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/28 20:33:31

Post by: Mythal

I'm actually astonished that the whole St Celestine Typo thing is causing such a big deal. I owe an apology to Melissia for disregarding her concerns on the matter - I honestly didn't think anyone would be so petty and small-minded as to try and take advantage of a typo in a copy of White Dwarf to gain a leg-up over an already underpowered army, but the thread in YMDC has proven me all kinds of wrong. Consider me educated - there really are people like that in the hobby. Damn, I must have been looking the other way when they slipped through the door.

I guess it must be the folks I play with - we generally aren't out to screw each other over, just have a laugh while moving toy soldiers around.

Reply by: Spiku - click to view full reply 

6445

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/28 21:28:15

Post by: Spiku

So I'm having trouble against 3++ stormshields.

Im finding without my own 3++, I'm having a lot of trouble dealing with BA/DA and GKs right now, if seraphim get into melee they are gone; celestine tends to go up and down like a necrophile in a morge, but without the 3++ I find my girls are being torn apart without enough of an answer.

Jacobs + assasins + crusaders do their job though, but it's hard making sure it's in position.

I can't decide on eviscerators right now; seems super necessary to get wounds in, but they just get killed off.

If only repentia could use their AoF in the enemy turn, I'd consider loading them in my retributor rhino.

Anyone got advice for the match up?

Edit:
Re Celestine:
I would draw you all to the following line on page 94 of the first white dwarf, under Acts of faith:

"+1 if the unit is joined by at least one of the following independant characters: Canoness, Ecclesiarchal Confessor, Saint Celestine, Uriah Jacobus or Arch-Confessor Kyrinov."

Sadly, your opponent is entirely within his rights to point out that the rules are that the latest publication takes precedence.

Reply by: Mythal - click to view full reply 

46877

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/28 22:44:33

Post by: Mythal

Spiku wrote:So I'm having trouble against 3++ stormshields.

Im finding without my own 3++, I'm having a lot of trouble dealing with BA/DA and GKs right now, if seraphim get into melee they are gone; celestine tends to go up and down like a necrophile in a morge, but without the 3++ I find my girls are being torn apart without enough of an answer.

Jacobs + assasins + crusaders do their job though, but it's hard making sure it's in position.

I can't decide on eviscerators right now; seems super necessary to get wounds in, but they just get killed off.

If only repentia could use their AoF in the enemy turn, I'd consider loading them in my retributor rhino.

Anyone got advice for the match up?

The only unit in your force capable of going toe-to-toe with a squad of 3++ is the Conclave. That's just the way it is. Thankfully, they're also the most cost-effective CC unit in the Codex - you're just limited by your HQ options in terms of how many you can field. There's nothing in your ranged armory that can do much to a squad like that, since Sisters lack pie plates - even an Exorcist will on average inflict <1 unsaved wound per barrage (slightly worse than a BSS unloading rapidfire bolter shots at them, assuming MEQ).

I would recommend rather than seeking out melee with such heavy infantry, take ground and wait for them to come to you - that makes putting your Conclave in position, theoretically, much easier, and gives you more time for your basic battle sisters to have at least done a little whittling of their numbers. That said, all of my advice is conjecture as I'm still waiting on my first full-scale application of the new Codex against MEQ, and as such haven't faced off against the dreaded 2+/3++ spam yet (just been doing some skirmishes this weekend to look at how they perform).

Spiku wrote:Sadly, your opponent is entirely within his rights to point out that the rules are that the latest publication takes precedence.

At which point I'd invite him to find someone else to play with. Possibly himself.

Reply by: Eumerin - click to view full reply 

34899

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/29 02:19:21

Post by: Eumerin

Cofessor Dallax wrote:So what evidence do you have to the contrary or even a compelling argument to suggest that this isn't the case?
Games Workshop have put their prices up to ridiculous new levels on ALL of their products this year, when they HAVE to be aware that there is a global economic crisis going on. They are obviously aware that there are some nut cases like myself who will still try to buy their products even at extortionate prices, that's why. Sell less but make more money when doing so. I mean let's be serious for a moment - when have Games Workshop made anything cheaper in the last x years???
Some stupid business analyst like myself has looked at the sales figures and come to the conclusion (rightly or wrongly), that this is the best idea.

How many other armies does GW sell where the following takes place?

Customer: Hello. I'd like to buy some basic troop models for the Sisters of Battle army.
GW Store Employee: Sure thing. Leave me your contact information, and I'll call you in a couple of weeks when the figures get here.

I rest my case.


Remember - you can't walk into any store and purchase these off the shelf. Your FLGS can't even special order them. Not only has GW made them quite expensive to purchase, but GW has also made it so that you need to jump through multiple hoops just to collect the basic figures for the army.

Reply by: Amaya - click to view full reply 

34168

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/29 02:56:55

Post by: Amaya

Let's face reality. GW does not care about Sisters of Battle. The 3rd ed. Codex was sadly better than this garbage. I seriously doubt that they will even produce a new SoB codex after this fiasco. There won't be enough interest in it to make it profitable.

Reply by: Kreedos - click to view full reply 

7818

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/29 03:06:24

Post by: Kreedos

I highly highly doubt they will drop Sisters of Battle, esp considering the amount of chatter it's been producing.

Reply by: Worglock - click to view full reply 

40741

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/29 04:51:45

Post by: Worglock

Fetterkey wrote:

Eremiel wrote:Most likely, I'll be buying a second set of WD issues so I can pull it apart and make copies of each page of our "'dex", use a pamphlet punch and put it in booklet form.

The bad old days return... hopefully we won't see a full return to the days of Chapter Approved, where you often had to have a "WD binder" with the latest rulings and articles for your army in addition to the Codex and rulebook.

Old Whine: "There's no reason to buy White Dwarf!!!!"

New Whine: "Now I have to buy White Dwarf!!!"




Automatically Appended Next Post:

Eumerin wrote:

Cofessor Dallax wrote:So what evidence do you have to the contrary or even a compelling argument to suggest that this isn't the case?
Games Workshop have put their prices up to ridiculous new levels on ALL of their products this year, when they HAVE to be aware that there is a global economic crisis going on. They are obviously aware that there are some nut cases like myself who will still try to buy their products even at extortionate prices, that's why. Sell less but make more money when doing so. I mean let's be serious for a moment - when have Games Workshop made anything cheaper in the last x years???
Some stupid business analyst like myself has looked at the sales figures and come to the conclusion (rightly or wrongly), that this is the best idea.

How many other armies does GW sell where the following takes place?

Customer: Hello. I'd like to buy some basic troop models for the Sisters of Battle army.
GW Store Employee: Sure thing. Leave me your contact information, and I'll call you in a couple of weeks when the figures get here.

Necrons, 90% of LotR, Anything that didn't make the jump to Finecast.

Sorry petal, it's not just you. Special orders are here to stay.

Reply by: morgendonner - click to view full reply 

14126

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/29 06:39:50

Post by: morgendonner

Worglock wrote:

Eumerin wrote:Customer: Hello. I'd like to buy some basic troop models for the Sisters of Battle army.
GW Store Employee: Sure thing. Leave me your contact information, and I'll call you in a couple of weeks when the figures get here.

Necrons, 90% of LotR, Anything that didn't make the jump to Finecast.

Sorry petal, it's not just you. Special orders are here to stay.

I've never seen a LGS without a Necron Warrior box available for sale. On top of that, Necrons have a sensible Battleforce set unlike Sisters which have none.

Necron Warriors come in a nice box that builds a full unit of warriors plus gives you some scarabs, Sisters now come in packs of 3 (meaning you need to buy at least 4 packs to field a unit). I really don't think you can even try to draw a comparison between the two.

Reply by: Melissia - click to view full reply 

29408

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/29 06:49:30

Post by: Melissia

Yeaaah, don't even bother trying that comparison.

Reply by: RatBot - click to view full reply 

45599

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/29 06:55:06

Post by: RatBot

Amaya wrote:Let's face reality. GW does not care about Sisters of Battle. The 3rd ed. Codex was sadly better than this garbage. I seriously doubt that they will even produce a new SoB codex after this fiasco. There won't be enough interest in it to make it profitable.

I'm pretty sure that the WD Codex is, in fact, meant to basically say to players the exact opposite, (IE "Hey, we haven't forgotten Sisters! Here's some new rules and stuff until we get the actual codex done!"). I would hope they're not going to judge demand for a new Sisters Codex based on sale of Sisters minis post-WD Codex. It seems unlikely, though, as supposedly the new SoB models are close to being ready for production (or so I thought I read somewhere), which would mean they're coming either way.

Reply by: Sidstyler - click to view full reply 

10093

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/29 07:01:59

Post by: Sidstyler

"...until we get the actual codex done!"

I think there would be less complaints if they actually said this much in the White Dwarf. Even as a "temporary" set of rules it still sucks and looks like no effort went into them, but it would piss people off less if they had some kind of confirmation that there would be something to come later that would actually be of acceptable quality.

Reply by: RatBot - click to view full reply 

45599

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/29 07:45:11

Post by: RatBot

Oh, I agree. That's what they SHOULD do. But, as well all know, letting your customers know what your future plans are is a devastating policy that will ruin everything!

Reply by: Deepeyes - click to view full reply 

41268

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/29 16:00:51

Post by: Deepeyes

I had a play with the sisters list against IG (1000pt). I won the game in the end but to be honest his leman russes were shooting quite poorly. I had the living saint as my HQ and I think she will be in just about every list I play. I just threw her at his army to soak up as much shooting as possible. She is fairly average in damage output but she can't just be ignored either and for 115pt I think she is priced right.

The WD dex is not as terrible as I thought it would be but it is too thin and there is room for improvement.

Reply by: Priest - click to view full reply 

5117

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/29 16:20:49

Post by: Priest

Being a relatively new poster here, I have a small suggestion........can this thread be moved from the News & Rumors board to Dakka Discussions?


Priest

Reply by: Boss GreenNutz - click to view full reply 

6589

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/29 17:11:07

Post by: Boss GreenNutz

Got a 2K game in against IG with my girls last night. They didn't do too badly. Outflanking Immolators with TLMMs and a Dominion squad packing a pair of Meltaguns got 2 Pask in his tank a Demolisher and a Chimera. The Immo was still alive at the end of the game but the girls did bite the bullet (well lasgun in this case) after disembarking. My other outflanking Immo got 2 Chimeras before loosing it's TLMM. The girls survived to contest an objective. Too bad there aren't any firepoints on an Immolator.

Reply by: Grundz - click to view full reply 

19377

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/29 17:28:40

Post by: Grundz

Im not a fan, i was hoping for some special flamethrowers or something to set them apart besides faith that makes little sense.

As for the ward/grey knight thing, I still have an outstanding offer to everyone locally that I'll happily use the old codex, If I dont have to pay like 70pts for my squad "sarges"

Reply by: Dr Mathias - click to view full reply 

45341

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/29 19:28:32

Post by: Dr Mathias

I've been out of 40K most of 4th and all of 5th edition, so the answer to this question may seem obvious to all but me.

The entry for the basic sisters squad has two sections for special/heavy weapons, in which a sister may replace her bolter with another type. The flamer is listed as an option in both sections- can a player take two flamers in a basic squad?

Reply by: pretre - click to view full reply 

20774

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/29 19:34:47

Post by: pretre

Dr Mathias wrote:I've been out of 40K most of 4th and all of 5th edition, so the answer to this question may seem obvious to all but me.

The entry for the basic sisters squad has two sections for special/heavy weapons, in which a sister may replace her bolter with another type. The flamer is listed as an option in both sections- can a player take two flamers in a basic squad?

Yes

Reply by: Ixquic - click to view full reply 

17836

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/29 19:37:31

Post by: Ixquic

Since the basic sister faith power is rerolling 1s to hit (useless for flamers) and dominions are twin linked, would the better loadout to be a bunch of flamers in dominion squads and 2 meltas in regular squads?

Reply by: Spiku - click to view full reply 

6445

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/29 19:42:51

Post by: Spiku

Not really, because the dominions infiltrate, and you want them close as possible for tank busting

Reply by: Melissia - click to view full reply 

29408

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/29 19:44:34

Post by: Melissia

Errr, no... they scout, no infiltrate.

Reply by: andrewm9 - click to view full reply 

16698

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/29 19:48:45

Post by: andrewm9

Spiku wrote:Not really, because the dominions infiltrate, and you want them close as possible for tank busting

The Dominions have Scout not Infiltrate. I can say that they can be effective if you have the first turn. I steamrolled Tau by using their Scout move this weekend. It was not pretty.

Reply by: pretre - click to view full reply 

20774

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/29 19:49:57

Post by: pretre

Yep, Scout Move, Blow Smoke, blow stuff up.
Or Outflank, blow stuff up.
Scout is pretty awesome.

Reply by: Melissia - click to view full reply 

29408

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/29 19:50:01

Post by: Melissia

Steamrolling Tau isn't necessarily the hardest thing to do...

Reply by: sharkticon - click to view full reply 

8371

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/29 19:53:04

Post by: sharkticon

Melissia wrote:Steamrolling Tau isn't necessarily the hardest thing to do...

So, you admit that sisters are better than tau

Reply by: scuddman - click to view full reply 

4776

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/29 19:58:16

Post by: scuddman

Against the top lists, I would do way better with Tau.

Tau have more tools to deal with mech than most of the other 2nd tier and lower armies. Tau's weak point is against straight rush down, which imperial mech handily counters in 5th these days.

Tau's a surprisingly good meta choice as long as you don't run into a hybrid build or a blood angel rushdown build.

Reply by: Melissia - click to view full reply 

29408

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/29 20:00:02

Post by: Melissia

sharkticon wrote:

Melissia wrote:Steamrolling Tau isn't necessarily the hardest thing to do...

So, you admit that sisters are better than tau

Better how? In the lore? Oh hell yes, indubitably so. But overall, for the codex alone? The Tau codex certainly is better, with more lore, more unit variety (or, more accurately, it actually has unit variety, unlike the WD rule update Sisters have now). Is the Sisters WD non-codex thing more powerful? That's debatable. Tau Empire is a codex which hasn't aged well and requires a certain playstyle and mindset to play right (much like Eldar, except Eldar has aged better than Tau have), certainly. Without said playstyle and tactics, they can be steamrolled quite easily, unlike most MEQ or even horde armies. With it, they have far more tools to give the army more flexibility and power than Sisters can manage.

They actually have more than one kind of tank, for example.

Reply by: scuddman - click to view full reply 

4776

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/29 20:01:01

Post by: scuddman

The Dominions have Scout not Infiltrate. I can say that they can be effective if you have the first turn. I steamrolled Tau by using their Scout move this weekend. It was not pretty.

Off topic, but this is why Tau builds without Kroot can't hang. If you don't have a cheap bubble wrap, you pretty much autolose to scouting or outflanking units playing with Tau. It's possible to beat the bike army with Tau, but pretty much undoable without kroot providing interference.

Reply by: Boss GreenNutz - click to view full reply 

6589

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/29 20:01:37

Post by: Boss GreenNutz

Immolators have no fire points. Ugh. I outflanked my Dominions against IG and had to unload the girls to smoke a Leman Russ while the TLMM got another one. Sure they pasted it but then died to massed flashlight fire. While a good tradeoff since it was Pasks' tank I'd still like to have kept them around another turn if they could have fired out of the Immo.

Reply by: scuddman - click to view full reply 

4776

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/29 20:03:19

Post by: scuddman

You could just take a rhino if you wanted to shoot out of the hatch. Odds are though, if you don't get first turn, your opponent will come after the scouting vehicles first.

Reply by: Boss GreenNutz - click to view full reply 

6589

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/29 20:06:14

Post by: Boss GreenNutz

Thought about that but the TLMM on the Immo was useful for getting a second Russ. Two less pie plates for the cost of one Dominion squad paid off I guess.

Reply by: ShumaGorath - click to view full reply 

4869

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/29 20:31:13

Post by: ShumaGorath

Deepeyes wrote:I had a play with the sisters list against IG (1000pt). I won the game in the end but to be honest his leman russes were shooting quite poorly. I had the living saint as my HQ and I think she will be in just about every list I play. I just threw her at his army to soak up as much shooting as possible. She is fairly average in damage output but she can't just be ignored either and for 115pt I think she is priced right.

The WD dex is not as terrible as I thought it would be but it is too thin and there is room for improvement.

Yes, I'm sure your immortal demon prince is equivalent to a space marine captain with a power sword. Priced juuuuuuust right. That thing is currently the single most undercosted unit in the game (Vendetta! You've been replaced!). I'm almost dead certain a typo is preventing it from being 215 points.

Reply by: Melissia - click to view full reply 

29408

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/29 20:32:57

Post by: Melissia

I think she should have remained ~200 pts myself, but should also have gotten eternal warrior because having a living symbol of the Emperor's power be taken out by a single multilaser shot is just wrong

Reply by: Spiku - click to view full reply 

6445

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/29 20:33:06

Post by: Spiku

Slip of the keyboard, I of course meant scout

Reply by: ShumaGorath - click to view full reply 

4869

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/29 20:33:58

Post by: ShumaGorath

Melissia wrote:

sharkticon wrote:

Melissia wrote:Steamrolling Tau isn't necessarily the hardest thing to do...

So, you admit that sisters are better than tau

Better how? In the lore? Oh hell yes, indubitably so.

I'm not sure an army that's been through four retcons can be better in the fluff.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Melissia wrote:I think she should have remained ~200 pts myself, but should also have gotten eternal warrior because having a living symbol of the Emperor's power be taken out by a single multilaser shot is just wrong

Skinny armor lady getting shot in the face with a laser canon is probably going to go down. If you want sub 300 for something that wins games alone by ignoring death you've gotta take a hit somewhere.

Reply by: S'jet - click to view full reply 

43067

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/29 20:45:38

Post by: S'jet

Can we compare the popularity trends of sisters to dark eldar? Dark Eldar were very old (model wise), with super old dex etc, and few played them. Then they get their whole set of shiny new models, new dex, and now they are very popular where i live. WHEN (stay positive=p) we get our dex (assuming its decent) and shiny new models, do you think the same thing will happen? It just seems afew people are saying sisters anrt popular, and the age of the army without a revamp seems to be the reason to me.

Reply by: ShumaGorath - click to view full reply 

4869

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/29 20:48:03

Post by: ShumaGorath

S'jet wrote:Can we compare the popularity trends of sisters to dark eldar? Dark Eldar were very old (model wise), with super old dex etc, and few played them. Then they get their whole set of shiny new models, new dex, and now they are very popular where i live. WHEN (stay positive=p) we get our dex (assuming its decent) and shiny new models, do you think the same thing will happen? It just seems afew people are saying sisters anrt popular, and the age of the army without a revamp seems to be the reason to me.

Witchhunters were a flop when they were released and sisters (unlike DE) have never been particularly popular. The sales lag is why they don't seem to get much official support.

Reply by: Melissia - click to view full reply 

29408

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/29 20:48:16

Post by: Melissia

ShumaGorath wrote:Skinny armor lady getting shot in the face with a laser canon is probably going to go down. If you want sub 300 for something that wins games alone by ignoring death you've gotta take a hit somewhere.

It's in her toughness and the fact that unlike other chars of a similar price she has no army-wide rules. She's basically just a pure tarpit.

Reply by: pretre - click to view full reply 

20774

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/29 20:48:20

Post by: pretre

S'jet wrote: do you think the same thing will happen? It just seems afew people are saying sisters anrt popular, and the age of the army without a revamp seems to be the reason to me.

There are many reasons SoB are rare. And of course they will see a surge when the new stuff comes out. Every army does.

Reply by: S'jet - click to view full reply 

43067

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/29 20:48:43

Post by: S'jet

Ok, i wasnt around way back then, which is why i sak =)

Reply by: pretre - click to view full reply 

20774

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/29 20:49:23

Post by: pretre

Melissia wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:Skinny armor lady getting shot in the face with a laser canon is probably going to go down. If you want sub 300 for something that wins games alone by ignoring death you've gotta take a hit somewhere.

It's in her toughness and the fact that unlike other chars of a similar price she has no army-wide rules. She's basically just a pure tarpit.

A tarpit with some good melee killy-ness.

5 Attacks at WS/I 7, 4+ PW doesn't hurt.

Reply by: Melissia - click to view full reply 

29408

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/29 20:50:49

Post by: Melissia

I think that if GW does put actual effort into it with good looking, normally priced plastic miniatures that are available in reasonably sized boxes (IE ten per squad, or two sprues of five with extra bitz more likely), excellently written lore, a wide variety of interesting color schemes, a varied and powerful army list, etc... you'll find people will be interested and buy it.

Right now, Sisters have none of this, of course.

Reply by: ShumaGorath - click to view full reply 

4869

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/29 20:57:42

Post by: ShumaGorath

Melissia wrote:I think that if GW does put actual effort into it with good looking, normally priced plastic miniatures that are available in reasonably sized boxes (IE ten per squad, or two sprues of five with extra bitz more likely), excellently written lore, a wide variety of interesting color schemes, a varied and powerful army list, etc... you'll find people will be interested and buy it.

Right now, Sisters have none of this, of course.

Most armies only need one or two of those to work. For sisters to need the hat trick says something.

Reply by: Melissia - click to view full reply 

29408

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/29 20:58:29

Post by: Melissia

All fifth edition codices (save Tyranids, arguably) have all of those.

Reply by: Vaktathi - click to view full reply 

6772

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/29 20:58:39

Post by: Vaktathi

Melissia wrote:I think that if GW does put actual effort into it with good looking, normally priced plastic miniatures that are available in reasonably sized boxes (IE ten per squad, or two sprues of five with extra bitz more likely), excellently written lore, a wide variety of interesting color schemes, a varied and powerful army list, etc... you'll find people will be interested and buy it.

Right now, Sisters have none of this, of course.

The fluff in the WD makes them seem like...well, pompous donkey-caves. To a degree in any exaggerated dark-ages-catholic-gothica in space should have an element of that, but they really didn't do much other than that. It's just "sisters arrive, being angry with FAITH makes them kill everything".


They could have done so much with the fluff here, even with relatively limited space...and didn't


that said, I'm mostly ok with the army list. On the whole its a bit cheaper, losing some of the wargear and faith stuff sucks but it's not all bad, 85pts for 4 HB's that rend 50% of the time is cool.


That said, more than anything, what the were they thinking with the Immolator? Why on earth is that thing 65pts? 45/50 I could see, but 65?


Also, lol celestine still doesn't have Hit and Run, making her an anchor on seraphim squads. Though for 115pts she's not bad at all.

Reply by: Melissia - click to view full reply 

29408

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/29 21:00:26

Post by: Melissia

Seraphim only hit and run half the time now instead of all the time like they used to anyway, so relatively speaking it's not as big a hit to the seraphim squad.

Reply by: ShumaGorath - click to view full reply 

4869

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/29 21:02:38

Post by: ShumaGorath

Melissia wrote:All fifth edition codices (save Tyranids, arguably) have all of those.

Only half the codexes are fifth though. Demons have many of the same issues sisters do concerning metal and lack of customization.

Reply by: Melissia - click to view full reply 

29408

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/29 21:04:30

Post by: Melissia

And you might notice Daemons are not as popular as fifth edition armies, yes? Glad you agree with me

Reply by: ShumaGorath - click to view full reply 

4869

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/29 21:05:59

Post by: ShumaGorath

Melissia wrote:And you might notice Daemons are not as popular as fifth edition armies, yes? Glad you agree with me

They're about on par with tyranids and orks. They're beating tau and necrons. They aren't dead last like the sisters have always been. When the witchhunters came out they had plenty of support and the level of modeling most armies had. They still had to be sent back to the distributer since no one was buying them off the shelves.

Reply by: pretre - click to view full reply 

20774

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/29 21:06:58

Post by: pretre

Vaktathi wrote:Also, lol celestine still doesn't have Hit and Run, making her an anchor on seraphim squads. Though for 115pts she's not bad at all.

Separate in the Movement Phase, assault the same target separately. But yeah, there is the anchor business for when you are assaulted.

Reply by: Melissia - click to view full reply 

29408

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/29 21:09:06

Post by: Melissia

ShumaGorath wrote:

Melissia wrote:And you might notice Daemons are not as popular as fifth edition armies, yes? Glad you agree with me

They're about on par with tyranids and orks. They're beating tau and necrons.

Woah there, I'd like to see your research on these statements. In my experience (purely anecdotal I know) Tyranid players and Ork players far outnumber Daemons players in 40k-- it's mostly in WFB that Daemons players rock out with their... socks out, as it were. Besides which, those armies, aside from Tyranids, are not actual fifth edition armies.

Reply by: ShumaGorath - click to view full reply 

4869

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/29 21:12:22

Post by: ShumaGorath

Melissia wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

Melissia wrote:And you might notice Daemons are not as popular as fifth edition armies, yes? Glad you agree with me

They're about on par with tyranids and orks. They're beating tau and necrons.

Woah there, I'd like to see your research on these statements. In my experience (purely anecdotal I know) Tyranid players and Ork players far outnumber Daemons players in 40k-- it's mostly in WFB that Daemons players rock out with their... socks out, as it were. Besides which, those armies, aside from Tyranids, are not actual fifth edition armies.

Which is why I keep hearkening back to when the witchhunters were new and failed to sell. The new army bump would probably see some people buy them, but unless they managed to reverse the trend of every other sisters release that bump would be temporary and small. Whatever the sisters hook is, GW hasn't found it.

My anecdotal experience has them roughly tied by the by, I'm mostly going by alliance sales reports.

Reply by: Japache - click to view full reply 

27211

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/29 21:13:42

Post by: Japache

Sorry if this was addressed, but is there any explanation for all the Inquisition iconography on the sisters minis anymore?

I'm thinking of converting some DE warriors & witches & am trying to figure out what to put on them.

Reply by: pretre - click to view full reply 

20774

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/29 21:17:31

Post by: pretre

Japache wrote:Sorry if this was addressed, but is there any explanation for all the Inquisition iconography on the sisters minis anymore?

I'm thinking of converting some DE warriors & witches & am trying to figure out what to put on them.

It isn't inquisition iconography for the most part. The I is shared by most of the different organizations in the Imperium. It was the Sigilite's sign, iirc.

Reply by: Melissia - click to view full reply 

29408

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/29 21:21:21

Post by: Melissia

ShumaGorath wrote:Which is why I keep hearkening back to when the witchhunters were new and failed to sell.

You mean when they released them very close to the end of third edition and people were afraid third to fourth would be like the transition from second to third, so they didn't want to invest in models? And the fact that it has very few pages of actual lore? And the fact that it has a very limited army list? And the fact that it essentially has copy/pasted units from a previous army list? And the fact that they were still mostly using the same exact models from second edition, no new plastic troops choices? And the fact that they were almost never actually seen in GW advertisements, especially WD?

Gee, how shocking that they didn't sell as well as armies that GW actually put effort into.

Reply by: pretre - click to view full reply 

20774

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/29 21:23:08

Post by: pretre

Does anyone else associate actual voices with people on the interwebs? Like you hear a certain voice in your head whenever you see them post?

Probably not.

Reply by: Melissia - click to view full reply 

29408

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/29 21:24:00

Post by: Melissia

Only for Frazzled. I associate the sound of yipping weiner dogs with his posts.

Reply by: ShumaGorath - click to view full reply 

4869

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/29 21:26:43

Post by: ShumaGorath

Melissia wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:Which is why I keep hearkening back to when the witchhunters were new and failed to sell.

You mean when they released them very close to the end of third edition and people were afraid third to fourth would be like the transition from second to third, so they didn't want to invest in models? And the fact that it has very few pages of actual lore? And the fact that it has a very limited army list? And the fact that it essentially has copy/pasted units from a previous army list? And the fact that they were still mostly using the same exact models from second edition, no new plastic troops choices? And the fact that they were almost never actually seen in GW advertisements, especially WD?

Gee, how shocking that they didn't sell as well as armies that GW actually put effort into.

That didn't happen to the orks moving into fifth! It's an endless cycle, BDSM nuns in rhinos don't sell well so they don't try hard. They don't try hard so they don't sell well. I'd prefer they kill the army entirely and just do a mechanicus army, the sisters have a bad relationship with existing and I really don't see that ever changing. Games workshop isn't going to invest the amount of money required on the chance that the sisters could redeem themselves in sales. They're going to spend the least possible for as long as possible. They're direct only as it is, they already have a foot in the grave.

Reply by: Melissia - click to view full reply 

29408

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/29 21:27:38

Post by: Melissia

ShumaGorath wrote:That didn't happen to the orks moving into fifth!

Because people expected the fourth to fifth transition to be like third to fourth, which wasn't all that dramatic.

Reply by: pretre - click to view full reply 

20774

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/29 21:27:52

Post by: pretre

Wow. This thread needs to be put down.

Reply by: ShumaGorath - click to view full reply 

4869

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/29 21:31:35

Post by: ShumaGorath

pretre wrote:Wow. This thread needs to be put down.

With spam posts like yours helping it to the grave. It's at 30 pages at this point, the question of sales viability of sisters was going to come up eventually.

Reply by: Manchu - click to view full reply 

16387

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/29 21:31:54

Post by: Manchu

The topic is still news, if not to our regulars. Please don't spam the thread with requests that it be locked or other off-topic comments.

Reply by: Backfire - click to view full reply 

15717

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/29 21:40:19

Post by: Backfire

Melissia wrote:I think that if GW does put actual effort into it with good looking, normally priced plastic miniatures that are available in reasonably sized boxes (IE ten per squad, or two sprues of five with extra bitz more likely), excellently written lore, a wide variety of interesting color schemes, a varied and powerful army list, etc... you'll find people will be interested and buy it.

Right now, Sisters have none of this, of course.

I don't think anyone disagrees with that. And I don't think GW plans to squat the Sisters, they have potential for a great visual theme which is just what GW likes, and their relaunch a'la Dark Eldar could be huge. Really, what happened is probably just that while they were talking around the water cooler just how awesome the upcoming DE range was and how all sculptors were busy with big Tomb King and Ogre monsters for FB, somebody blurted out "Hey, but what about the Sisters of Battle?" "Oh crap, we forgot about the Sisters of Battle!" "Hey, how about we just quickly write them a WD codex to show the SoB players that we haven't forgot them?" "Hey SoB players! Here's a new codex for ya which shows we haven't forgot you!"

I'm not a SoB player but I can sympathize with some of the nerd rage over the codex. Obviously all the simplifications take out lots of character from the army, even if it's not necessarily weaker (see: Chaos Space Marines...). Of course, the fluff is extremely bare, though improvment in the sense that it makes the SoB about the SoB, and not Inquisition. It is disappointing they didn't add much in the way of new units to replace what was lost. I mean, why not put Repressor in? Sure it doesn't have GW model, but it's not like that has stopped them before, often there is not even any kind of picture how the unit is supposed to look. At least Celestine looks like a good choice now, following the current GW style to make named characters near-mandatory.

Funny thing btw: Blood Angels PDF codex, which caused similar reactions amongst BA players what we see amongst Sisters players now, actually made me interested about starting Blood Angels. Then Space Hulk came out, and my interest grew...and then the real codex came out, and my interest just totally died. It was bizarre. I'm still not sure why, but maybe the lesson is that sometimes less is more.

Reply by: Spiku - click to view full reply 

6445

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/29 21:42:08

Post by: Spiku

Dominions really do rely on 1st turn it seems; though they do buy some much wanted exorcist (and seraphim in my case) time.

I'm having trouble getting Jacobus and the Assassinettes in the most useful of places; certainly teleporting can be a pig, but you've got a good half of the board under their watchful eye. Edit: At present I have two crusaders in here, I'd do another I think, but I can't find another dark angel storm shield

Seraphim not having reliable HnR, and no 3++ has really caused some hurt. But double tapping re-rolled wound hand flamers is rather nasty. Both pistols make their points back. I'd still trade it in for 4th edition double tap after hit n run on enemy assault

If you use Repentia at all, and do the whole Retributor Immo/Rhino for them, do your best to make sure they aren't going to see anyone, and they aren't going to get pie plated. Having Scouts distract your repentia from getting in the vehical they are smoking outside of on first turn really does throw points away.


I can't tell you how sad I am that my master of the ravenwing conversion canoness doesn't get to play anymore. Perhaps an overimaginative jump pack canoness model, but I liked it. I somewhat doubt there will be a jet bike option in a future dex, so into the brake fluid she goes~

Reply by: Melissia - click to view full reply 

29408

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/29 21:42:28

Post by: Melissia

The only new unit they added was the command squad, which itself isn't actually a new unit, it's just three celestians, a hospitaller, and a dialogous (even the squad itself is basically a reworking of Celestian retinues)... and the ecclesiarchy battle squad thing, which itself isn't actually a new unit, it's just a group of crusaders, DCA, and/or arco-flagellants... all of which were pre-existing units.

So basically nothing actually new at all, just a slight re-organization of old units.

Reply by: Marthike - click to view full reply 

42808

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/29 21:43:40

Post by: Marthike

I personally think is even just a sisters squad come out in plastic people will buy sisters probably as popular as GK if they got a good average codex.

Reply by: Backfire - click to view full reply 

15717

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/29 21:44:05

Post by: Backfire

ShumaGorath wrote:
That didn't happen to the orks moving into fifth!

Uh, they put Orks in the starter set? And that is very well written codex, and the army was very powerful, arguably the top army for quite some time.

Reply by: pretre - click to view full reply 

20774

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/29 21:49:15

Post by: pretre

Manchu wrote:The topic is still news, if not to our regulars. Please don't spam the thread with requests that it be locked or other off-topic comments.

We'll have to agree to disagree. The WD is out and has been for a little while now, so it isn't really news or rumor at this point. Also, as SG just pointed out we haven't been discussing the actualy topic of the thread for pages and pages now (anyone not aware of the actual news might be hard pressed to find it in the midst of the 30+ pages). The current topic of sales viability of SoB is a bit off from 'SOB WD Part 2'.

Anyways...

Reply by: Alkasyn - click to view full reply 

19636

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/29 21:59:20

Post by: Alkasyn

Melissia wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

Melissia wrote:And you might notice Daemons are not as popular as fifth edition armies, yes? Glad you agree with me

They're about on par with tyranids and orks. They're beating tau and necrons.

Woah there, I'd like to see your research on these statements. In my experience (purely anecdotal I know) Tyranid players and Ork players far outnumber Daemons players in 40k-- it's mostly in WFB that Daemons players rock out with their... socks out, as it were. Besides which, those armies, aside from Tyranids, are not actual fifth edition armies.

In my Tournament experience, Deamons make up 75% of the armies I face. Personal experience doesn't mean much I guess.

Reply by: Dysartes - click to view full reply 

21358

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/29 22:04:34

Post by: Dysartes

ShumaGorath wrote:It's an endless cycle, BDSM nuns in rhinos don't sell well so they don't try hard. They don't try hard so they don't sell well. I'd prefer they kill the army entirely and just do a mechanicus army, the sisters have a bad relationship with existing and I really don't see that ever changing. Games workshop isn't going to invest the amount of money required on the chance that the sisters could redeem themselves in sales. They're going to spend the least possible for as long as possible. They're direct only as it is, they already have a foot in the grave.

Strange - I'm pretty sure that people were saying similar things about the "BDSM Elves on Sail Barges" before there was confirmation of the DE relaunch - I'm a little dubious about the "BDSM nuns" label, as I'm fairly sure you could only really apply that to the repentia, not the army as a whole.

2nd ed SoB suffered from being the last codex before 3rd ed, and (from what I remember) not getting as much support in WD as previous codexes had.

Codex: WH also suffered from being late in an edition cycle, from seeing a limited number of new SoB figures (maybe half the new releases, with the rest being the =][=, including the Walking Throne of Doom) - and those new releases only giving two new selections to the SoB, in the Repentia (which didn't go down very well at the time, due to sculpts) and the Exorcist (and, for some reason, people hated on the pipe organ look, though I thought it was pretty cool).

When your basic troops choice(s) are all metal - at a low(ish) points cost - and you're recycling sculpts that were 5-6 years old to start with, people are unlikely to rush out to buy a new army.

Daemonhunters got away with it as you didn't need that many of the metal troops, as they were expensive - and, in the case of the Terminators at least, they were gorgeous sculpts.

Reply by: Spiku - click to view full reply 

6445

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/29 22:11:33

Post by: Spiku

Repentia went down badly because they were terrible units that cost huge amounts. If they had only been faithful, as they rightly should given their fluff, they might have been picked up.

I don't get why people hate on the organ either; was very thematic.

Reply by: scuddman - click to view full reply 

4776

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/29 22:58:26

Post by: scuddman

Well, to be fair, they always have been heralds of a new edition. If you look back, they were the last released 2nd edition codex...and then shortly after 3rd ed invalidated their codex. They were one of the last 3rd ed codecies, and while 4th ed didn't invalidate them, it did cause a lot of rules problems. They might not be the herald of a new edition this time, but they damn well are close to it again, since 6th ed is already in the works.

Looking back...investing in sob/witchhunters is a fool's errand. They didn't get a codex in 4th, and it looks like they won't really get one in 5th. When they get updated, they are always the last to get updated...so of course they sell poorly. If you invested in them in 2nd edition and got burned..you had to wait until near the end of 3rd before you got an official release. Gw follows a production line approach, not a service approach. That means some armies that are less popular will always be less popular.

Privateer Press's expansion model actually works better here imo because then all armies get treated equally. Everytime a new expansion comes out, everybody gets something new/updated.

So why even have this white dwarf? I guess the idea is do away with allies and remove an army book that allowed some strange weirdness and loopholes to happen. Now every "book" is self-sufficient.

Like I said before, if you thought it was for serious playtesting or was something they put a lot of effort into, I'm sorry...it's just not what the company does.

Edit: So to be on topic, what is news? Well, there won't be a Sisters of Battle codex before 6th edition. If they were going to do one, they wouldn't have bothered with this white dwarf. Remember that BOLS rumor that was saying 5th's focus was supposed to be on imperial armies and 6th on xenos? I hope that rumor is not true, as the implication is that the army will be screwed again. I was really hoping that maybe they would be in the upcoming starter box or something, but that seems really really unlikely.

Reply by: The Grog - click to view full reply 

5528

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/30 02:09:15

Post by: The Grog

ShumaGorath wrote:
Yes, I'm sure your immortal demon prince is equivalent to a space marine captain with a power sword. Priced juuuuuuust right. That thing is currently the single most undercosted unit in the game (Vendetta! You've been replaced!). I'm almost dead certain a typo is preventing it from being 215 points.

Unlike a demon prince, she can't take squads all that fast due to 4+ to wound, and she is threatened by ID by a lot of stuff. She's a remarkable nuisance, but 215? No way. Not on a T3 model without EW in this list. DE may have the tricks to make T3 ICs work, I don't think Sisters really do.

As for new codex timing, I think like this:
A the Sisters are one of the early lines, maybe even a 6th ed box launch considering constant rumors of new plastics
B they go to the back of the bus again, behind the major types of rainbow marines, Eldar, and maybe Orks & 'nids.

Reply by: frgsinwntr - click to view full reply 

6931

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/30 02:26:53

Post by: frgsinwntr

troy_tempest wrote:I've played Tau intensively since 2009 and I have had to fight tooth and nail in almost every game to get a win or draw.

Played the new SoB rules twice now (using old dex point costs) vs. vanilla marines and guard. The easiest two victories I've ever had.

If people really want to complain about a terrible codex I recommend a few games using Tau or Necrons, especially at low points.

I went 5 and 3 at the NOVA this weekend with tau. I barely lost to Dash of pepper and his shiney new DE... and barely lost to a 5 dread grey knight army.... I beat a death wing army, a khan biker list, battle wagon orks, and two other Grey knights. The tau codex is over costed but has options....

This sisters codex makes me a sad Panda :( I don't think it can perform.... but maybe with some Special character shenanigans.....

Oh yea my third loss was to Simon leen and his DoA... Tau's worst match up

Reply by: AlexHolker - click to view full reply 

31545

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/30 04:17:08

Post by: AlexHolker

scuddman wrote:Privateer Press's expansion model actually works better here imo because then all armies get treated equally.

Equally poorly. My problem with the Sisters more than anything is that they don't get multipart plastic kits like everyone else, not how many months it is until the next edition is released. And isn't that the position every Privateer Press army is in?

Reply by: schadenfreude - click to view full reply 

23433

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/30 04:29:44

Post by: schadenfreude

I got the WD today and my verdict is new sisters=CSM 2.0 It has 1 competitive builds that spams a lot of the same units, which can be a competitive army but it's not nearly as much fun as having options. Half the options are tripe, and the other half are golden. Looking at only the good units in the WD dex competitive lists would have.

Saint Celstine, good luck ever stopping her from contesting an objective if sisters go 2nd.
Old man Urias for the reroll on faith checks
3 Exorcists
3 Dominions with 2 melta guns and a Rhino
Total=785ish off the top of my head.
Plenty of points left over for squads of 10 sisters with 2 melta guns in a Rhino, and there might be room to fit 4 squads of them in at 1500 point list if one of the meltas is downgraded to a flamer. The only real option I have not listed is replacing a sisters squad with a henchman squad (DCS + Crusader mix to your taste)

A sisters list with nothing but Saint Celistine, Urias, Exorcists, 2 melta dominions in Rhinos, henchmen, and 2 melta sisters in Rhinos is a competitive all comers army at 1,500-1750. Then again a CSM list with nothing but 2 lash HQs, Plague marines, and Oblits is a competitive all comers army at 1,500-1750. They both work, it just sucks having a codex with 1 competitive build.

Reply by: paintedpotato - click to view full reply 

9614

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/30 06:43:48

Post by: paintedpotato

schadenfreude wrote:I got the WD today and my verdict is new sisters=CSM 2.0

Just like the Chaos codex release it reminds me of the Lolrus.

Spoiler:

Reply by: Dysartes - click to view full reply 

21358

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/30 07:00:43

Post by: Dysartes

AlexHolker wrote:Equally poorly. My problem with the Sisters more than anything is that they don't get multipart plastic kits like everyone else, not how many months it is until the next edition is released. And isn't that the position every Privateer Press army is in?

I'm a little confused here, Alex - PP has been breaking out the plastic/resin/whatever-you-want-to-call-it for certain larger kits (warjacks, both heavy and light, and certain medium-based units, as well as the new two-player starter set), but at no point have they ever said that they intend to produce multi-part plastic infantry. As a company, they prefer working with metal, and I have to say that, bar a couple of kits, I agree with the choice.

SoB, on the other hand, are produced by a company that swims in a sea of plastic - yet their only plastic kit was the Immolater add-on sprue.

Reply by: Omegus - click to view full reply 

30289

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/30 08:03:21

Post by: Omegus

Eremiel wrote:Most likely, I'll be buying a second set of WD issues so I can pull it apart and make copies of each page of our "'dex", use a pamphlet punch and put it in booklet form.

Right, because sales catalogues are precious, and must be preserved for the future!

Reply by: AlexHolker - click to view full reply 

31545

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/30 10:19:56

Post by: AlexHolker

Dysartes wrote:I'm a little confused here, Alex...

It's pretty simple: I do not consider restic or metal an acceptable alternative to multipart plastics. They're more expensive for what's, for my purposes, an inferior product. And PP shouldn't either, given the lower labour per model required is just what they need if they want to scale production to meet demand.

GW is doing it through negligence while PP does it on purpose, but they're still doing the same thing.

Reply by: Alex0077 - click to view full reply 

46035

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/30 13:40:50

Post by: Alex0077

Well with part 2 of the WD codex it seems that "Death Pit" may have been called againest Cruddace and that could explain things?

Reply by: ShumaGorath - click to view full reply 

4869

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/30 13:57:27

Post by: ShumaGorath

Alex0077 wrote:Well with part 2 of the WD codex it seems that "Death Pit" may have been called againest Cruddace and that could explain things?

I've hated his books since he ruined the game with IG. Guys not a competant codex writer, he makes blatantly unbalanced books with consistent rules issues. The guy created the "rules"
for "skimmers" on large oval bases. Those things still don't work.

Death pit!

Reply by: Alex0077 - click to view full reply 

46035

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/30 19:11:33

Post by: Alex0077

Now, if this is a stop gap codex like BA and WoC, maybe when their book comes out they will get plenty of new toys. Look at Imp Guard Vendettas, maybe SoB will get Landraiders or Storm Ravens.

Reply by: Marthike - click to view full reply 

42808

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/30 19:16:06

Post by: Marthike

I wish they get some skimmers maybe a floating shrine lol.

most army have one except the sisters I think and tyranids but they are not a mech army lol

Reply by: ph34r - click to view full reply 

11

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/30 19:31:40

Post by: ph34r

Alex0077 wrote:Now, if this is a stop gate codex like BA and WoC, maybe when their book comes out they will get plenty of new toys. Look at Imp Guard Vendettas, maybe SoB will get Landraiders or Storm Ravens.

Stop gate or stop gap?

Reply by: Tyr Grimtooth - click to view full reply 

43386

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/30 19:33:48

Post by: Tyr Grimtooth

I could have fun playing this temporary codex, but not with the current models or pricing structure.

Sorry GW, I will not be a crap metal model dumpster for your inventory. I can wait and enjoy my Wolves till then.

Reply by: dkellyj - click to view full reply 

31886

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/30 19:45:58

Post by: dkellyj

"Old man Urias for the reroll on faith checks"

I've been seeing this line (or variation) all over the net.
READ THE RULES
Jacobus does NOT allow you to re-roll your Faith test.
He allows you to reroll the number of Faith Points you get per turn.
A HUGE Difference.

Reply by: mendrak - click to view full reply 

47530

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/30 20:51:23

Post by: mendrak

Just spoke with my FLGS guy about the september WD he hasn’t received yet and he qote me his GW distributor in Canada : « We cannot have them anymore there was a printing issue, but don’t worry, the SOB dex will be up in PDF on GW web site in a couple of weeks »

….golf claps!!!!

For those who haven’t spend 10$ yet… save it!!!!

Reply by: Kreedos - click to view full reply 

7818

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/30 20:54:05

Post by: Kreedos

mendrak wrote:Just spoke with my FLGS guy about the september WD he hasn’t received yet and he qote me his GW distributor in Canada : « We cannot have them anymore there was a printing issue, but don’t worry, the SOB dex will be up in PDF on GW web site in a couple of weeks »

….golf claps!!!!

For those who haven’t spend 10$ yet… save it!!!!

Well, I'm sure glad I don't live in Canada near that bad FLGS =). I'd be so pissed if someone said "I can't do anything about it wait a few weeks." I'd laugh in his face, and never step foot in that store again.

Reply by: mendrak - click to view full reply 

47530

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/30 20:59:15

Post by: mendrak

Well, I'm sure glad I don't live in Canada near that bad FLGS =)

Dont't shot the messenger tough!

Reply by: Kreedos - click to view full reply 

7818

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/30 21:08:00

Post by: Kreedos

Nah just the store owner dakka dakka dakka dakka.

Reply by: Finnlock - click to view full reply 

26673

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/31 00:29:59

Post by: Finnlock

Well I for one was really hoping for something more...I man I love the Sisters as anyone who has read my blog post cn tell you.. http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/284267.page

but come on..no new mini's or modles? nothing on the horizion? Bah!

I was hoping this would let me get back into painting and modding...

Reply by: DarkTraveler777 - click to view full reply 

20344

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/31 02:45:21

Post by: DarkTraveler777

Kreedos wrote:Nah just the store owner dakka dakka dakka dakka.

Who was quoting a GW distributor rep. Wow, if that is all it takes for you to boycott a game store I'd hate to see what you did when a restaurant served you the wrong order.

Reply by: Your Friend Doctor Robert - click to view full reply 

41554

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/31 02:50:00

Post by: Your Friend Doctor Robert

Alex0077 wrote:Now, if this is a stop gap codex like BA and WoC, maybe when their book comes out they will get plenty of new toys. Look at Imp Guard Vendettas, maybe SoB will get Landraiders or Storm Ravens.

There's fluff against Land Raiders, but Storm Ravens could actually be pretty neat. Ability to swap the Hurrican Bolters for Flamestorm Cannons? Strap a Penitent Engine to the back? This sounds good...

Reply by: Deepeyes - click to view full reply 

41268

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/31 03:22:02

Post by: Deepeyes

Your Friend Doctor Robert wrote:

Alex0077 wrote:Now, if this is a stop gap codex like BA and WoC, maybe when their book comes out they will get plenty of new toys. Look at Imp Guard Vendettas, maybe SoB will get Landraiders or Storm Ravens.

There's fluff against Land Raiders, but Storm Ravens could actually be pretty neat. Ability to swap the Hurrican Bolters for Flamestorm Cannons? Strap a Penitent Engine to the back? This sounds good...

I would like them to get vendettas personally. All those sexy lc, it would help with their long range AT.

Reply by: Kreedos - click to view full reply 

7818

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/31 03:48:25

Post by: Kreedos

DarkTraveler777 wrote:

Kreedos wrote:Nah just the store owner dakka dakka dakka dakka.

Who was quoting a GW distributor rep. Wow, if that is all it takes for you to boycott a game store I'd hate to see what you did when a restaurant served you the wrong order.

Seeing as it's my main army, yeah I'd be pretty pissed if the FLGS in my area just didn't get it because of an alleged printing problem. If I got the wrong order at a restaurant I would ask them to remake it. I'd tip well, but I'd probably never go to that restaurant again unless the food was something amazing. You should expect a quality of service in a business, they're there to provide a service. If you'd just take the food that you didn't order, not say a word, and just pay for what you didn't order, that says something about you.

Reply by: lledwey - click to view full reply 

36817

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/31 04:00:31

Post by: lledwey

So because the store owner, outside of his own control, can't acquire more WD copies, you won't go to his store? Do you realize how ridiculous that sounds? I'm sure he'd order the guy another WD if he could.

Reply by: dkellyj - click to view full reply 

31886

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/31 04:08:34

Post by: dkellyj

I'd like to see the Repressor get a rework.
AV12,11,10. Stormbolter turret that can be upgraded to a single Hvy Bolter, Hvy Flamer, or MM. Smoke, Searchlight. 3 access ports, each side and the front. 6 firepoints. Assault vehicle (and allowed to be taken by Repentia Squads). Not sure of points cost...maybe on par with a Chimera.

Reply by: remilia_scarlet - click to view full reply 

45258

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/31 04:23:26

Post by: remilia_scarlet

Spoiler:

Is my only response to the new WD codex.

Reply by: thehod - click to view full reply 

1986

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/31 04:49:42

Post by: thehod

Correct me if I am wrong but dont BA Razorbacks get TL heavy flamers for 55 points (tacticals) and are fast without any sort of negatives? Not to mention with 5 marines and a melta for close to 150 points (20 points).

Reply by: SagesStone - click to view full reply 

14070

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/31 05:00:20

Post by: SagesStone

Yep, they just really really liked some of the shiny stuff the Witch Hunters had. So they made their own version of some of it.

*points at Sanguinor and Infernus Pistol*

Reply by: remilia_scarlet - click to view full reply 

45258

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/31 05:11:21

Post by: remilia_scarlet

n0t_u wrote:Yep, they just really really liked some of the shiny stuff the Witch Hunters had. So they made their own version of some of it.

*points at Sanguinor and Infernus Pistol*

"I'm not a space marine, I want to be unique >:T" - random adeptus sororitas.

Reply by: SagesStone - click to view full reply 

14070

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/31 05:20:19

Post by: SagesStone

remilia_scarlet wrote:

n0t_u wrote:Yep, they just really really liked some of the shiny stuff the Witch Hunters had. So they made their own version of some of it.

*points at Sanguinor and Infernus Pistol*

"I'm not a space marine, I want to be unique >:T" - random adeptus sororitas.

"I'm not a normal space marine, I want to be unique" - random Black Templar, Space Wolf, Blood Angel, Grey Knight or Dark Angel.

Reply by: remilia_scarlet - click to view full reply 

45258

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/31 05:30:23

Post by: remilia_scarlet

I honestly didn't care for them when I played them, now, I think I'll keep them in my closet another 5 years.

Reply by: SagesStone - click to view full reply 

14070

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/31 05:39:58

Post by: SagesStone

I'm actually considering shelving them myself at the moment, or rather just letting them stay as they are until the proper codex comes out and invalidates a few loadouts this WD codex makes.

Reply by: The Grog - click to view full reply 

5528

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/31 06:11:14

Post by: The Grog

thehod wrote:Correct me if I am wrong but dont BA Razorbacks get TL heavy flamers for 55 points (tacticals) and are fast without any sort of negatives? Not to mention with 5 marines and a melta for close to 150 points (20 points).

Just one of the reasons people are so unhappy.

Reply by: schadenfreude - click to view full reply 

23433

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/31 08:02:55

Post by: schadenfreude

The Grog wrote:

thehod wrote:Correct me if I am wrong but dont BA Razorbacks get TL heavy flamers for 55 points (tacticals) and are fast without any sort of negatives? Not to mention with 5 marines and a melta for close to 150 points (20 points).

Just one of the reasons people are so unhappy.

Immolaters are just plain terrible before they are compared to a BA fast razorback. They should be 50 points or less.

10 sisters with 2 meltas and a rhino clock in at 180, which is about on par with 205 for 10 BA with 2 meltas and a rhino. The FNP and FC do put the BA>sisters, but that's the fault of priests being completely broken and not the cost of the assault marines. 180 for 10 sisters with 2 meltas in a rhino>210 for 10 tac marines with 1 melta and 1 mm in a rhino. There is just no good way to put an entire tac marine squad in a rhino and make effective use of their heavy and special weapon at the same time.

125 for 5 dominions with 2 melta gun in a rhino>148 for 5 assault marines with 1 melta in a razorback. 5 dominions with 2 meltas in a rhino is a solid unit that can outflank and use their act of faith to TL the melta shots without disembarking from the rhino. From a competitive standpoint the unit is nothing short of amazing for it's cost, but that all comes at the price of them competing with seraphims that are terrible now and compete for the same force org.

If every sisters army has the same 3 exorcists for HS, the same 3 dominions for FA, Saint Celestine, Old Man Urias, and the same 10 sister duel melta+rhino squads in troops the result is all sisters lists will look the same. It's like going to Baskin Robbins only to find out they are serving 31 varieties of mint chocolate chip ice cream, each one distinct and different from the others in very subtle ways.

The 1 build is ok, but without multiple competitive builds sisters will not attract many new players especially when combined with uncertainty of how their eventual real codex will be supported.

Reply by: Omegus - click to view full reply 

30289

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/31 09:35:02

Post by: Omegus

Deepeyes wrote:I would like them to get vendettas personally. All those sexy lc, it would help with their long range AT.

I had some great fun running air cav with a bunch of sisters supported by vets, all in valkyries/vendettas. Sisters with Furious Charge and Counter-Attack were great.

Reply by: ShumaGorath - click to view full reply 

4869

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/31 13:08:43

Post by: ShumaGorath

remilia_scarlet wrote:

n0t_u wrote:Yep, they just really really liked some of the shiny stuff the Witch Hunters had. So they made their own version of some of it.

*points at Sanguinor and Infernus Pistol*

"I'm not a space marine, I want to be unique >:T" - random adeptus sororitas.

I play marines and I don't get half that. Just send a letter with an unknown white powder to matt ward. He'll understand.

Reply by: DarknessEternal - click to view full reply 

28444

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/31 14:02:42

Post by: DarknessEternal

n0t_u wrote:
*points at Sanguinor and Infernus Pistol*

Dante's Inferno Pistol predates the Witchunters one by 15 years.

Reply by: ShumaGorath - click to view full reply 

4869

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/31 14:11:35

Post by: ShumaGorath

DarknessEternal wrote:

n0t_u wrote:
*points at Sanguinor and Infernus Pistol*

Dante's Inferno Pistol predates the Witchunters one by 15 years.

Marines want their command squad back as well

Reply by: Pyriel- - click to view full reply 

20650

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/31 15:04:20

Post by: Pyriel-

Immolaters are just plain terrible before they are compared to a BA fast razorback. They should be 50 points or less.

Dont have the codexes in front of me now but what does the immolator cost compared to a SM heavy flamer razorback again?

Reply by: pretre - click to view full reply 

20774

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/31 15:09:36

Post by: pretre

Same price as a C:SM razorback with TL-HF.

Reply by: ShumaGorath - click to view full reply 

4869

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/31 15:10:55

Post by: ShumaGorath

pretre wrote:Same price as a C:SM razorback with TL-HF.

Given the fact that it's the exact same thing that makes sense.

Reply by: andrewm9 - click to view full reply 

16698

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/31 15:20:37

Post by: andrewm9

ShumaGorath wrote:

pretre wrote:Same price as a C:SM razorback with TL-HF.

Given the fact that it's the exact same thing that makes sense.

Except that its too much for both SM and Sisters. Apparently Mat Ward thought so as well since Blood Angels only pay 55 points for theirs and its fast as well.

Reply by: ShumaGorath - click to view full reply 

4869

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/31 15:23:02

Post by: ShumaGorath

andrewm9 wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

pretre wrote:Same price as a C:SM razorback with TL-HF.

Given the fact that it's the exact same thing that makes sense.

Except that its too much for both SM and Sisters. Apparently Mat Ward thought so as well since Blood Angels only pay 55 points for theirs and its fast as well.

Well at least sisters get storm bolters for 3. I still pay 10. Watching this stuff creep along is dreadful.

Reply by: Melissia - click to view full reply 

29408

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/31 15:30:42

Post by: Melissia

Actually, by the lore, the Immolator uses its own unique STC, in fact, it's the STC from which the Hellhound is derived.

Reply by: ShumaGorath - click to view full reply 

4869

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/31 15:34:11

Post by: ShumaGorath

Melissia wrote:Actually, by the lore, the Immolator uses its own unique STC, in fact, it's the STC from which the Hellhound is derived.

It sure looks like a rhino with a glass window attached to a hole on top.

Reply by: Mythal - click to view full reply 

46877

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/31 15:43:07

Post by: Mythal

ShumaGorath wrote:It sure looks like a rhino with a glass window attached to a hole on top.

Actually, that's because the way you build a Rhino from an Immolator Kit is to put a glass window over the hole in the top - but I can see where someone who's not messed around with the kit would be confused given that half of the photos show them with SM Rhinos, and half with this weird Rhino-esque-thing.

The Immolator itself actually has a manned turret towards the front of the roof, to which the twin-linked weapons are attached. If you're assembling it as an Immolator and not a Rhino, the glass cover is actually a viewport that sits at the front of the turret - you can see it on the Games Workshop website, if you're interested

Reply by: Pyriel- - click to view full reply 

20650

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/31 15:49:18

Post by: Pyriel-

Given the fact that it's the exact same thing that makes sense.

Dunno, somehow all the SoB fans keep thinking they are entitled to a cheaper version of the very same thing SM get.

Actually, by the lore, the Immolator uses its own unique STC, in fact, it's the STC from which the Hellhound is derived.

Own STC addon rather. They are still based on the very same STC chassi.

Reply by: ShumaGorath - click to view full reply 

4869

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/31 15:55:07

Post by: ShumaGorath

Mythal wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:It sure looks like a rhino with a glass window attached to a hole on top.

Actually, that's because the way you build a Rhino from an Immolator Kit is to put a glass window over the hole in the top - but I can see where someone who's not messed around with the kit would be confused given that half of the photos show them with SM Rhinos, and half with this weird Rhino-esque-thing.

The Immolator itself actually has a manned turret towards the front of the roof, to which the twin-linked weapons are attached. If you're assembling it as an Immolator and not a Rhino, the glass cover is actually a viewport that sits at the front of the turret - you can see it on the Games Workshop website, if you're interested

I was thinking of the immolator, it's just attached vertically

Reply by: Mythal - click to view full reply 

46877

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/31 15:55:18

Post by: Mythal

Pyriel- wrote:Dunno, somehow all the SoB fans keep thinking they are entitled to a cheaper version of the very same thing SM get.

That's essentialist, derogatory and, therefore, impolite.

I think the Heavy Flamer Immolator is priced fine. The issue seems to be that GW refused to price it universally the same as the Razorback - instead, they arbitrarily declared that rerolling less than 3 heavy bolter wounds per game turn was worth 25 points. A better move if they wanted direct parity would have been to price the Immolator on the basis of being equipped with T-L Heavy Bolters, and cost the upgrades in line with the C:SM Razorback, making the differences between the two purely related to their twin-linked anti-tank upgrade (and, of course, aesthetic).

Edit:

ShumaGorath wrote:I was thinking of the immolator, it's just attached vertically

Ahh - mea culpa, I misunderstood what you were getting at.

Reply by: Pyriel- - click to view full reply 

20650

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/31 16:05:01

Post by: Pyriel-

That's essentialist, derogatory and, therefore, impolite.

But that also happens to be 100% correct.
Also it doesnt include any insults or hints of such, it simply states a fact that shines throughout this whole thread. Sorry if you got insulted, wasnt my intention.
Granted I should have changed the "all" for "majority" but still.

SoB fans do complain, whine, argue, nag, whatever, about immolators needing to be cheaper then their SM equivalents.

I think the Heavy Flamer Immolator is priced fine. The issue seems to be that GW refused to price it universally the same as the Razorback - instead, they arbitrarily declared that rerolling less than 3 heavy bolter wounds per game turn was worth 25 points. A better move if they wanted direct parity would have been to price the Immolator on the basis of being equipped with T-L Heavy Bolters, and cost the upgrades in line with the C:SM Razorback, making the differences between the two purely related to their twin-linked anti-tank upgrade (and, of course, aesthetic).

I somewhat agree.
I think the immolator should come with a HB as base and cost 5p more then the SM base razorback due to the wound rerolls and 6++.
Then the same pricing rules would be applied as the SM razorback pays to upgrade to HF.

All in all I think every SM based vehicle (rhino, razorback, immolators etc) should have price reductions on peripheral upgrades like stormbolters since they are overpriced.

Reply by: Mythal - click to view full reply 

46877

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/31 16:31:41

Post by: Mythal

Pyriel- wrote:Granted I should have changed the "all" for "majority"

Which was rather my point - I don't feel the Immolator with T-L Heavy Flamers is overpriced, hence "all" manifestly can't apply.

Pyriel- wrote:SoB fans do complain, whine, argue, nag, whatever, about immolators needing to be cheaper then their SM equivalents.

Ahh - for that, blame Mat Ward. Before the new WD Codex, from the perspective of an SoB player, the Heavy Flamer Immolator was very reasonably priced - 65 points, with pseudo-fast, and a firepoint (which is represented by an extensively modelled top hatch).

In exchange, they paid over the odds for T-L Multi-Meltas, and chronically over the odds for T-L Heavy Bolters (5 points less for the bolters than a 5th edition C:SM player pays for T-L Lascannons or Las-Plas, to put it in perspective). But there was at least some give and take in the arrangement - the pseudo-fast and firepoint in particular. It wasn't 'proper' fast, because the vehicle didn't gain a Flat Out move. Instead, it could fire the flamers (and only the flamers) if it moved at cruising speed.

Then, along comes Codex: Blood Angels. With its fast FLAMER Predator - exactly the sort of tank that the SoB players had been clamouring for to represent the Holy Trinity of weapons, while still remaining uniquely removed from Space Marines. And, on top of that, fast FLAMERbacks costing 10 points less than the Immolator. Not pseudo-fast, not limited by the Holy Trinity in its upgrade options, just faster and cheaper. But, even then, it gives hope - evidently Mat Ward feels that the firepoint is worth the 10 points, that's fine.

And then the new Codex comes out, the Immolator loses both its pseudo-fast and firepoint, gains a 6++ save that RAW say can never be taken, and still costs the same. Now, I can take a step back and say "Okay, this is just Cruddace trying to maintain parity with the Space Marine Razorback, and just being as clumsy as a three-legged tortoise in the process - and C:BA isn't C:SM and was costed insanely badly, which was Ward dropping the ball." But similarly, I understand there'll be people who're frustrated about it - particularly when taken in light of it being the SoB's only properly armed transport, and the Repressor not even being legalised as a 'get you by' measure.

Things will quieten down now that the new Codex is out, and nobody's waiting for another shoe to drop any more.

Reply by: Pyriel- - click to view full reply 

20650

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/31 16:37:26

Post by: Pyriel-

Then, along comes Codex: Blood Angels. With its fast FLAMER Predator - exactly the sort of tank that the SoB players had been clamouring for to represent the Holy Trinity of weapons, while still remaining uniquely removed from Space Marines. And, on top of that, fast FLAMERbacks costing 10 points less than the Immolator. Not pseudo-fast, not limited by the Holy Trinity in its upgrade options, just faster and cheaper. But, even then, it gives hope - evidently Mat Ward feels that the firepoint is worth the 10 points, that's fine.

Well that+s irrelevant as specialist codexes get new/better things here and worse there.
BA hammernators cost more for example.

Space pup longfangs are a ton better then SM devs and they get more meltas and flamers in their squads then salamanders do etc etc.
At the same time they pay in other areas so it evens out.
Thus if SoB players thing they are the only ones seeing other armies getting what that they think should be theirs then they are wrong.

Reply by: Mythal - click to view full reply 

46877

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/31 16:48:47

Post by: Mythal

Pyriel- wrote:Thus if SoB players thing they are the only ones seeing other armies getting what that they think should be theirs then they are wrong.

Didn't say it was right - in fact, I went on to explain why I disagreed with the view But it's human nature. Look at socialism.

Reply by: wyomingfox - click to view full reply 

8723

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/31 17:02:13

Post by: wyomingfox

Pyriel- wrote:All in all I think every SM based vehicle (rhino, razorback, immolators etc) should have price reductions on peripheral upgrades like stormbolters since they are overpriced.

That depends on perspective. SM vehicles compared to BA and GK vehicles would be slightly overcosted. But SM vehicles compared to the majority of MC would be severely undercosted.

I would prefer to see vehicles, especially transports, get significant price hikes to account for thier increased survivability and increased tactical utility. Of course given the continued power creep of vehicles in 5th edition codices, I doubt that will happen.

Reply by: ShumaGorath - click to view full reply 

4869

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/31 17:04:33

Post by: ShumaGorath

Pyriel- wrote:

Then, along comes Codex: Blood Angels. With its fast FLAMER Predator - exactly the sort of tank that the SoB players had been clamouring for to represent the Holy Trinity of weapons, while still remaining uniquely removed from Space Marines. And, on top of that, fast FLAMERbacks costing 10 points less than the Immolator. Not pseudo-fast, not limited by the Holy Trinity in its upgrade options, just faster and cheaper. But, even then, it gives hope - evidently Mat Ward feels that the firepoint is worth the 10 points, that's fine.

Well that+s irrelevant as specialist codexes get new/better things here and worse there.
BA hammernators cost more for example.

Space pup longfangs are a ton better then SM devs and they get more meltas and flamers in their squads then salamanders do etc etc.
At the same time they pay in other areas so it evens out.
Thus if SoB players thing they are the only ones seeing other armies getting what that they think should be theirs then they are wrong.

As far as I have ever been able to tell the only area they pay in is 5 points for hammernators. Virtually every choice in both the space wolf and blood angels books that aren't exact copies of a unit in C:SM are superior in some way without costing more. Likewise in Grey Knights. Vulkan and those terminators are about the only thing keeping C:SM even remotely competitive.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Mythal wrote:

Pyriel- wrote:Thus if SoB players thing they are the only ones seeing other armies getting what that they think should be theirs then they are wrong.

Didn't say it was right - in fact, I went on to explain why I disagreed with the view But it's human nature. Look at socialism.

Yeah, scandanavia is totally overpowered with it's socialism trait. It's not fair that they all get FnP from their social healthcare system but still make more per model then we do while paying the same points cost after you consider the default upgrades we have to buy (We're like the only codex still having to pay for insurance grenades, and our's don't even work as well).

Reply by: Revarien - click to view full reply 

26489

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/31 17:22:32

Post by: Revarien

The grass is always greener on the other codex...



As far as THIS codex goes, I think it lacks flavor (or 'flavour' )... I 'get' that the 6++ on everything Sister-ish and the faith system is our special rule, but I don't think it's substantial... novel yes, substantial - no.

The faith system lacks variation, imo: most of the powers (save for a few - eg. retributors, seraphims) have to do with HITTING the enemy... nothing to do with WOUNDING the enemy. When that is very much a big issue for this army in CC (along with 3 initiative, but that's not my point).

*edit* hit submit too soon >.<

Also... this army is all about fire and flame and cleansing... where are the 'set the building on fire' or 'create inferno dangerous terrain' rules or something colorful like that?! Yeesh... seems just too quickly done, that's all.

Reply by: Mythal - click to view full reply 

46877

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/31 17:26:06

Post by: Mythal

ShumaGorath wrote:Yeah, scandanavia is totally overpowered with it's socialism trait. It's not fair that they all get FnP from their social healthcare system but still make more per model then we do while paying the same points cost after you consider the default upgrades we have to buy (We're like the only codex still having to pay for insurance grenades, and our's don't even work as well).

Actually, it varies whether you're playing Vanilla Scandinavia, or one of the specific Chapters.

Reply by: ph34r - click to view full reply 

11

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/31 17:31:44

Post by: ph34r

Pyriel- wrote:

That's essentialist, derogatory and, therefore, impolite.

But that also happens to be 100% correct.
Also it doesnt include any insults or hints of such, it simply states a fact that shines throughout this whole thread. Sorry if you got insulted, wasnt my intention.
Granted I should have changed the "all" for "majority" but still.

SoB fans do complain, whine, argue, nag, whatever, about immolators needing to be cheaper then their SM equivalents.

Maybe because SoB only get 2 shooting transport variants, with one of them being massively worse than the SM equiv and one of them being the same. As they do not get access to las/plas and TLplas, not to mention even dual AC, they do deserve cheaper immolators. If you can't understand the fundamentals behind that concept, then this website is probably too complicated for you.

Reply by: AlexHolker - click to view full reply 

31545

Sisters of Battle WD part 2 @ 2011/08/31 18:02:14

Post by: AlexHolker

Pyriel- wrote:Well that+s irrelevant as specialist codexes get new/better things here and worse there.

And the army that invented the TLHF Razorback/Immolator doesn't count?

◄ 1 2 3 4 ► Pg# Go to page...