Personally I am quite happy with the overall "buff" the army received with this dataslate. While I know it is definitely a mixed bag for units like the Exorcist (the indirect fire nerf, though I guess now I am actually glad I can choose to spend the CP for it or not) and straight nerfs to others like Sacresants, I believe this will be a general good for the army. I was a big VH player but I may actually try Ebon Chalice again now since Orders in general are getting this durability buff. I just hope Bloody Rose does not automatically become the go to again because now they gain durability in addition to damage.
Again, while ERJAK is being his usual pessimistic self (no offense I really do respect everything you say dude, you keep it real) I think these changes are going to overall make us better, even if we just get to the point where we are competing with Marines but at least we would both be at upper B tier (maybe actually low A again). Additionally I am legitimately wondering if, toward the very end of 9th, we will actually see a 2.0 codex for Sisters at this point. The amount of changes in these dataslates do at least warrant reprints of most of the codices that have received buffs/nerfs from this (or hopefully even reprinted pdf versions of the books) but the changes to upcoming sub factions like Iron Warriors in Chaos (my assumption is they will not be getting the "reduce AP -1 and AP -2 by 1" trait now and will instead get the Valorous Heart/Salamanders treatment) plus the SM 2.0 codex that is almost definitely getting released toward the end of this year is going to have at least Armor of Contempt in it along with the Salamanders change. Honestly, all of these rebalancing changes for the game just make me think that the codices that are getting the most "bugfixes" or "patches" just deserve some kind of reskin like a 2.0 book similar to the Space Marines favoritism.
I know I have brought this up before and I know that its unlikely, but between Novitiates, Armor of Contempt, Miracle Dice each turn now, the Valorous Heart change and of course just the basic points updates, there are MANY things in that codex that make it not even worth picking up at this point for the rules of the game. I know this can be said for plenty of armies, but at this point I honestly think every faction deserves some kind of reprint/2.0 book after Daemons and Imperial Guard get their updates.
Anyway, we will see what happens. I do think that now it is imperative that Sacresants return to 14 points (though I would accept 15) along with Dominions going back to 12 despite the slight durability buff. Everything else can stay where it is since Vahl is getting a buff from this too (though I would rather her be 270-275, her being more than the Avatar of Khaine just feels bad when she's just barely a match for him with the best of luck). I am also in agreement that Paragons may actually have a better role in the army now even without a 5++.
While I am upset that I will have more issues with Deathguard now because of their own increased durability, I think we are underestimating the power of these changes, and we will soon find that, with Custodes/Tau/Harlies brought back down to lower S tier, we actually have a real shot again at punching above our weight into upper A tier at least (despite being in upper B or lower A at best along with Marines and Chaos too I'm sure).
Deathguard is still too slow you beat them not by killing them but playing the mission
Custodes was already a win it just got easier
Tau/aeldari got nerfs comparative to us
Guard got buffs but wernt a problem and still arn't
marines really not a problem they have two few Models compared to us and we still output a whack got buffed roughly parallel the better player should win. Br repentia are still ap4. Paragon warsuits ap3 . Marines saving on 5 or 6 still go down
Crusher stampede - our toughest match before nids get buffed - this is probably a loss but with the extra durability I feel I can swap Blinding Radiance for rapturous Blows which should help. Still not confident I can win
I haven't got it all painted as my 4th Novitiate Squad is on my painting table but this would be my first draft post changes
GFdoubles wrote: Personally I am quite happy with the overall "buff" the army received with this dataslate. While I know it is definitely a mixed bag for units like the Exorcist (the indirect fire nerf, though I guess now I am actually glad I can choose to spend the CP for it or not) and straight nerfs to others like Sacresants, I believe this will be a general good for the army. I was a big VH player but I may actually try Ebon Chalice again now since Orders in general are getting this durability buff. I just hope Bloody Rose does not automatically become the go to again because now they gain durability in addition to damage.
Again, while ERJAK is being his usual pessimistic self (no offense I really do respect everything you say dude, you keep it real) I think these changes are going to overall make us better, even if we just get to the point where we are competing with Marines but at least we would both be at upper B tier (maybe actually low A again). Additionally I am legitimately wondering if, toward the very end of 9th, we will actually see a 2.0 codex for Sisters at this point. The amount of changes in these dataslates do at least warrant reprints of most of the codices that have received buffs/nerfs from this (or hopefully even reprinted pdf versions of the books) but the changes to upcoming sub factions like Iron Warriors in Chaos (my assumption is they will not be getting the "reduce AP -1 and AP -2 by 1" trait now and will instead get the Valorous Heart/Salamanders treatment) plus the SM 2.0 codex that is almost definitely getting released toward the end of this year is going to have at least Armor of Contempt in it along with the Salamanders change. Honestly, all of these rebalancing changes for the game just make me think that the codices that are getting the most "bugfixes" or "patches" just deserve some kind of reskin like a 2.0 book similar to the Space Marines favoritism.
I know I have brought this up before and I know that its unlikely, but between Novitiates, Armor of Contempt, Miracle Dice each turn now, the Valorous Heart change and of course just the basic points updates, there are MANY things in that codex that make it not even worth picking up at this point for the rules of the game. I know this can be said for plenty of armies, but at this point I honestly think every faction deserves some kind of reprint/2.0 book after Daemons and Imperial Guard get their updates.
Anyway, we will see what happens. I do think that now it is imperative that Sacresants return to 14 points (though I would accept 15) along with Dominions going back to 12 despite the slight durability buff. Everything else can stay where it is since Vahl is getting a buff from this too (though I would rather her be 270-275, her being more than the Avatar of Khaine just feels bad when she's just barely a match for him with the best of luck). I am also in agreement that Paragons may actually have a better role in the army now even without a 5++.
While I am upset that I will have more issues with Deathguard now because of their own increased durability, I think we are underestimating the power of these changes, and we will soon find that, with Custodes/Tau/Harlies brought back down to lower S tier, we actually have a real shot again at punching above our weight into upper A tier at least (despite being in upper B or lower A at best along with Marines and Chaos too I'm sure).
In my defense, I was overwhelmingly positive about the original 8th edition codex (still one of the best books GW has ever written) and that only got better when the Multimelta change came in (even if I knew immediately we'd end up paying for it in the long run).
My problems really only started with the 9th edition dex where they just did some incredibly weird stuff for no reason. Like...tale of the stoic? Why? Who thought THAT was a good idea?
And now the powercreep combined with STILL catching nerfs is starting to wear big-time. Even when they do something to 'buff' us, it ends up having a backhand in it for no discernable reason. Why don't sacresants get AoC? They have a 4+ invul, it literally only effects AP1 and AP2, which was an ability they ALREADY HAD.
GFdoubles wrote: Personally I am quite happy with the overall "buff" the army received with this dataslate. While I know it is definitely a mixed bag for units like the Exorcist (the indirect fire nerf, though I guess now I am actually glad I can choose to spend the CP for it or not) and straight nerfs to others like Sacresants, I believe this will be a general good for the army. I was a big VH player but I may actually try Ebon Chalice again now since Orders in general are getting this durability buff. I just hope Bloody Rose does not automatically become the go to again because now they gain durability in addition to damage.
Again, while ERJAK is being his usual pessimistic self (no offense I really do respect everything you say dude, you keep it real) I think these changes are going to overall make us better, even if we just get to the point where we are competing with Marines but at least we would both be at upper B tier (maybe actually low A again). Additionally I am legitimately wondering if, toward the very end of 9th, we will actually see a 2.0 codex for Sisters at this point. The amount of changes in these dataslates do at least warrant reprints of most of the codices that have received buffs/nerfs from this (or hopefully even reprinted pdf versions of the books) but the changes to upcoming sub factions like Iron Warriors in Chaos (my assumption is they will not be getting the "reduce AP -1 and AP -2 by 1" trait now and will instead get the Valorous Heart/Salamanders treatment) plus the SM 2.0 codex that is almost definitely getting released toward the end of this year is going to have at least Armor of Contempt in it along with the Salamanders change. Honestly, all of these rebalancing changes for the game just make me think that the codices that are getting the most "bugfixes" or "patches" just deserve some kind of reskin like a 2.0 book similar to the Space Marines favoritism.
I know I have brought this up before and I know that its unlikely, but between Novitiates, Armor of Contempt, Miracle Dice each turn now, the Valorous Heart change and of course just the basic points updates, there are MANY things in that codex that make it not even worth picking up at this point for the rules of the game. I know this can be said for plenty of armies, but at this point I honestly think every faction deserves some kind of reprint/2.0 book after Daemons and Imperial Guard get their updates.
Anyway, we will see what happens. I do think that now it is imperative that Sacresants return to 14 points (though I would accept 15) along with Dominions going back to 12 despite the slight durability buff. Everything else can stay where it is since Vahl is getting a buff from this too (though I would rather her be 270-275, her being more than the Avatar of Khaine just feels bad when she's just barely a match for him with the best of luck). I am also in agreement that Paragons may actually have a better role in the army now even without a 5++.
While I am upset that I will have more issues with Deathguard now because of their own increased durability, I think we are underestimating the power of these changes, and we will soon find that, with Custodes/Tau/Harlies brought back down to lower S tier, we actually have a real shot again at punching above our weight into upper A tier at least (despite being in upper B or lower A at best along with Marines and Chaos too I'm sure).
In my defense, I was overwhelmingly positive about the original 8th edition codex (still one of the best books GW has ever written) and that only got better when the Multimelta change came in (even if I knew immediately we'd end up paying for it in the long run).
My problems really only started with the 9th edition dex where they just did some incredibly weird stuff for no reason. Like...tale of the stoic? Why? Who thought THAT was a good idea?
And now the powercreep combined with STILL catching nerfs is starting to wear big-time. Even when they do something to 'buff' us, it ends up having a backhand in it for no discernable reason. Why don't sacresants get AoC? They have a 4+ invul, it literally only effects AP1 and AP2, which was an ability they ALREADY HAD.
Many questionmarks.
I agree with you there sir, the 8th edition book was easy to be positive about, and there is no doubt you had relatively glowing things to say about it! I wish they would have just added the new units (and custom orders) to the 8th edition book (along with Core and other 9th edition structural changes of course). Tale of the Stoic is still the most ridiculous thing in our book and I am still unsure why it's even there. As for the Sacresants not getting AoC I disagree with it but I understand them trying to just standardize everything with a "storm shield" or equivalent piece of wargear. I think as soon as they drop back to 14 (or even 15) points (which I expect to happen next CA) they will be back to good instead of decent but now slightly overcosted.
I understand that GW has been doing questionable things throughout this edition, which is why I am such a proponent of a sort of "cleanup" once everyone has their 9th edition books. Whether its reprints of books, pdfs, 2.0 books, etc. every faction NEEDS to have all of these rules (and perhaps some relevant rewrites to other rules in their codex) in their actual books/pdfs and not just a catch all pdf otherwise players trying to get into the game will have no clue what is going on (in an even worse way than their current cluelessness due to all of this bloat).
What I honestly dislike from all this (more than the backhandedness of this update) is that the "ignore AP -1" custom order trait didn't get the Valorous Heart treatment. I wish that changed to a no reroll rule of some kind or just something else, since I was using that for my custom order rules when I wasn't bringing competitive Valorous Heart. It just feels like a redundant part of the book now unless you want to at least let Sacresants keep ignoring AP -1 but now the entire army can't reduce AP -2 and above right? Part of me wishes there was some loophole in there but giving up AoC to make Sacresants only ignore AP -1 doesn't feel worth it. I don't know, maybe there was a reason for them keeping it in there though, something we might be missing.
U02dah4 wrote: Deathguard is still too slow you beat them not by killing them but playing the mission
Custodes was already a win it just got easier
Tau/aeldari got nerfs comparative to us
Guard got buffs but wernt a problem and still arn't
marines really not a problem they have two few Models compared to us and we still output a whack got buffed roughly parallel the better player should win. Br repentia are still ap4. Paragon warsuits ap3 . Marines saving on 5 or 6 still go down
Crusher stampede - our toughest match before nids get buffed - this is probably a loss but with the extra durability I feel I can swap Blinding Radiance for rapturous Blows which should help. Still not confident I can win
I haven't got it all painted as my 4th Novitiate Squad is on my painting table but this would be my first draft post changes
I haven't really been thinking about the non-marine matchups too much and most of my analysis thus far has been in a vacuum so let me try to broaden my thinking here.
Agree on deathguard. Special mention to plagueburst crawlers no longer being able to dig out repentia mines or hidden objective grabbers.We'll be lucky to actuall kill 1 full unit over the course of a game, but like you said, we don't really need to. A dogmata wins this matchup pretty much by itself with it's obsec ability.
I agree about custodes. I only played one match against full power custodes and to be honest, I lost, but I lost because of his shenanigans on the mission and the game only going to 3 turns. In a full game I would have tabled him at the rate we were going.
Honestly, Tau have always been a hard matchup, regardless of if the book was good or not. This is one where the sacresant nerf hits the hardest. I think here we'll see the AoC change cancel out some of the ground we made up in the nerfs. I still expect this to be a 70-30 match in Tau's favor. Still better than the 90-10 it was previously, though.
Don't know that much about new Eldar. I think we'll still get rolled by Harlequins and struggle with DE because of how much we struggle with fast hybrid damage armies, but I honestly don't have enough information about baseline eldar to have an opinion here.
Agreed on guard. None of the buffs really matter to anything but our tanks and I'm not worried about lasguns into rhinos.
Codex Marines I don't really care about. They're a lot tougher, but we don't use a lot of AP1 or AP2 as is and things like Bladeguard and Smashcaptains saw no meaningful bonuses either. Dreadnaughts are more of a problem, but it MIGHT get canceled out if marine players decide to avoid investing in invuls.
Dark Angels: This matchup gets real bad, real fast now. Deathwing Termies are basically unkillable and their massed stormbolters rip through our units, which AoC helps precisely not at all. Combine that with excellent melee and even outnumbering them doesn't really help for long.
Deathwatch. Interestingly, VH is actually much improved against deathwatch, essentially shutting off their army rule. Otherwise a fairly even matchup as they have more tools to do shenanigans than vanilla marines.
Black Templar: Fairly even matchup. What we do and what they do is very similar. The AoC I think gives them the edge now, though.
Blood Angels, Space Wolves: Not meaningfully different. We dodge most of their AoC and didn't really rely on Sacresants to win these. Not auto-wins by any means but didn't really get worse for us.
GK: Nightmarishly more difficult. GK were already the best marine faction, now we can't really kill their objective campers anymore. NDKs didn't get AoC so we're not totally boned but this got a lot harder.
Tsons: Also got a lot harder. We generally do good into psychic armies, but them being able to shrug off most of our damage is rough. Against mortal wound spam builds we'll be about the same but any shift into more conventional shooting/melee will go poorly for us.
CSM: Tougher by default but...meh. Still not afraid of them until their book drops.
Necrons, Orkz, Admech, Knights, Daemons, GSC: All armies that we didn't rely 100% on sacresants to beat. All armies AoC helps out against. Should be easier, if only just.
Nids: New codex nids are going to be EVERYONE'S boogeyman. If crusher stampede doesn't get the axe, we're basically a bye round. If it DOES, we have a better than average chance against the mortal wound spam builds. Still going to be rough.
Because TS and DA and IF might be strong against us but I can't remember the last time I played any competatively
I also think tau isn't so bad its my most practiced against army and I was looking at 7-10/20 if I went first pre changes. That should be an easy win now if I go first and I'm confident I could beat a weaker tau player if I went second. (A good tau player going first might still be a loss but I will scrape more points).
New elder was insane but after the changes harlequins are taking a lot less stuff and we are getting better saves board wide. Prior I was looking at a 3/20 if they went first I know that will be a lot better now but I don't know how much till I get some games in
So yes crusher stampede and gk are probably the nightmare matchups but even then gk going second especially dreadknight spam is probably ok
I'm looking at trying a crusade force. So Power Level not Points, and for theme reasons I'm trying as pure as possible a Paragon Warsuit force.
This means that a lot of decisions are made for me - Her Holy Clankyness plus 3 squads of Paragons comes to 47 power, with no easy option to expand it, and then each suit can choose primary and secondary guns and melee weapon at will with no impact on cost.
The remaining 3 power going on an infantry model not in a warsuit seems odd, but I guess an imagifer would fit visually? Plus that gives me a CHARACTER who can earn experience - Morwen is awesome but a slight liability in crusade where named characters are locked out of earning battle honours, relics and sainthood boosts.
The big choices I'd have to make are the order conviction (s) and the ratio of melta weapons, maces and krak launchers.
I'm looking at trying a crusade force. So Power Level not Points, and for theme reasons I'm trying as pure as possible a Paragon Warsuit force.
This means that a lot of decisions are made for me - Her Holy Clankyness plus 3 squads of Paragons comes to 47 power, with no easy option to expand it, and then each suit can choose primary and secondary guns and melee weapon at will with no impact on cost.
The remaining 3 power going on an infantry model not in a warsuit seems odd, but I guess an imagifer would fit visually? Plus that gives me a CHARACTER who can earn experience - Morwen is awesome but a slight liability in crusade where named characters are locked out of earning battle honours, relics and sainthood boosts.
The big choices I'd have to make are the order conviction (s) and the ratio of melta weapons, maces and krak launchers.
Any advice?
Do you have a saint Potentia worth the title? That would be my first starting point.
As far as Nundams, Stormbolters are always better, stick with them. I'd give a litte over a third Melta to start.
Well, at 3 power, the only options are palatine, dialogous, hospitaler and imagifer.
Hospitaler is out as warsuits are VEHICLES, making her pretty useless.
The palatine aura is nice but duplicates Morwens.
Of the other two, both have their uses, and even if all the Saint archives is getting martyred and dropping a big xp dump, that's still nice.
I was thinking imagifer largely for visual reasons but I guess the dialogus might be good too - the hymn of shoot lots of bolters might be worth having in my back pocket.
Noted about storm bolters. I guess with so few models it's hard to argue with 18 stormbolters for crowd control. Three multimeltas and Morwens missile launcher is reasonably good antitank and then I guess its a choice between flamer and heavy bolter.
Devout fanaticism + either guided by emperors will or righteous suffering
instead of BR.
The +1 hit negates some (or is randomly better occasionally) than the +1A and the +1AP is less impactfull now.
I would argue that the better AP is more necessary now that many of our opponents will ignore some AP. I have, however, considered using DF with GBTEW as a kind of "middle ground" between BR's melee punchiness and AS's shooting prowess. The problem was that it would likely be the worst of both worlds.
In other news, one knock-on effect of the advent of Armor of Contempt is that our Arco-flagellants, once a decent unit that was just barely short of being competitive, are now basically useless. Marines and other Sisters will ignore their AP-1 weapons. Arcos are just destined to be one of those units that can't catch a break, it seems.
U02dah4 wrote: Assuming you up against an ap ignoring faction
The better ap does nothing on most of our squads because ap1 is ignored
That leaves
Some characters - No enough of a boost to become a real threat.
Paragon warsuits - A legitimate boost on Mace's but this is probably a one of And the swords don't really need it
Repentia - Ap2 was the sweetspot and ap3 is now that takes a 2+ down to a 4++ these already are ap3 - the extra ap helps in some targets but not many
Sacresants halberd- same as repentia Sacresants- Mace's- legitimately benefit Problem with both is I'm dropping them now there's no bodyguard
So no im not sure the ap is that helpful now
In your Novitiate builds, AP isn't really that relevant. The only thing you're really keeping BR for is Tear them down+ The double damage strat.
In Zephyrim heavy builds (which is kinda where I think the meta of Sisters builds is going just based of of not needing to paint 100+ infantry models) then the AP is hugely important. Going from 0 to 1 means nothing, going from 3 to 4 is HUGE. The number of 5++invul auras in marine armies is likely going to tank now that you need AP-4 to get them to a 6+.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Captain Joystick wrote: Huh, repentia also have armour of contempt, even though that save isn't going to come up that often.
Literally the only situation it matters is if you have cover and are going up against a weapon that is exactly Ap-1 AND ignores invuls.
I wouldn't underestimate some of the br strats the paragon one is rare but amazingly strong when it applies.
Good luck and yes if you don't have the models to begin with mine is a difficult painting task.
Do you have a list of what yours looks like?
I think your right I don't get enough from BR now ap1 is neutered
I am thinking the plus 1 to hit on charge and the can't be wounded on 1, 2's. For my build is probably best - novitiates perform equally to br under that but the extra survivability feeds into my board control
U02dah4 wrote: I wouldn't underestimate some of the br strats the paragon one is rare but amazingly strong when it applies.
Good luck and yes if you don't have the models to begin with mine is a difficult painting task.
Do you have a list of what yours looks like?
I think your right I don't get enough from BR now ap1 is neutered
I am thinking the plus 1 to hit on charge and the can't be wounded on 1, 2's. For my build is probably best - novitiates perform equally to br under that but the extra survivability feeds into my board control
I'm still working on the ratios but I have a BR list and an OoML list that are very similar but function very differently due primarily to Junith.
OoML is:
Junith, Celestine, Morvenn, 3 basic BSS squads, 10 Sacresants with Halberds (might switch to hammers with this many Zephyrim but I have 10 halberds painted), Dogmata, Imagifier(Candela Scroll, Tale of the Warrior), Hospitaller (book) 3x10 Zephyrim with at least 1 Banner, 2x4MM Retributors with 1 Cherub each, 1 Anchorite Mortifier.
This is a 'rapid approach deathball' and relies a lot on having all 11 CP to pump into the Zephyrim and Retributors. I'm not sure if less melee for another squad of Rets is the better option atm though. I'm also toying with the idea of dropping something to fit in an Emperor's Grace Canoness to make the deathball even tankier against shooting. Interestingly, once I start to take casualties, the +1 to hit bonus starts making serious gains.
This one I'm less sure on. I'd really like to cut Morvenn for another Rhino and some more repentia support, but if the deathball is maintainable, I really want the reroll to wounds.
That said, I think this one might end up using a lot more deepstriking or cover humping than the OoML setup, so Morvenn might not be as useful as more target saturation.
If your going ooml you want the mortal wound sword cannonness its the best thing about ooml.
I'd probably drop the dogmata. While you want 2bss and 1 Novitiate regardless. Even if it's just because they are great bodyguard units now bodyguard doesn't work.
In both armies I'd consider swapping 1 mm rets for paragon warsuits
I think morvehn + celestine is too many points in characters but it's certainly interesting and now how I would play
U02dah4 wrote: If your going ooml you want the mortal wound sword cannonness its the best thing about ooml.
I'd probably drop the dogmata. While you want 2bss and 1 Novitiate regardless. Even if it's just because they are great bodyguard units now bodyguard doesn't work.
In both armies I'd consider swapping 1 mm rets for paragon warsuits
I think morvehn + celestine is too many points in characters but it's certainly interesting and now how I would play
I've played the mortal wound sword canoness in about 6 games, she's gotten into combat maybe...twice? Without a transport or run and charge, she's just too slow. Emperor's Grace and/or Word of the Emperor is the only reason I'd bother with her and I'm not sure that beats out the Dogmata's Obsec ability.
Novitiates aren't worth it to me over BSS unless they're bloody rose or I'm bringing A LOT of them. To just sit on a backfield objective, they're about the same but the BSS give me 20pts to work with.
I run Celestine in every list. I've yet to find anything that does as much work as she does for the points. I generally drop Movenn first if I want to clear out character space.
I suppose that comes to difference in playstyle I keep her amongst the horde and use her as a countercharger never had a problem getting her in. She's just so damn effective at munching primaris/custodes especially if you are not takeing morvehn and can wl her properly
I'm not saying either morvehn or celestine is a bad choice their both good just the combination leads to about 30% of your points being on characters which is too much
U02dah4 wrote: I suppose that comes to difference in playstyle I keep her amongst the horde and use her as a countercharger never had a problem getting her in. She's just so damn effective at munching primaris/custodes especially if you are not takeing morvehn and can wl her properly
I'm not saying either morvehn or celestine is a bad choice their both good just the combination leads to about 30% of your points being on characters which is too much
My thing is, no one ever charges my horde, or even gets close. Even Custodes matchups mostly play keep-away, focusing on whittling down my units with shooting (or in the case of Tau, obliterating my units with shooting) even when I played against pure deathwing, they didn't even attempt melee until three turns of stormbolter shooting had passed and just hoped to make up my objective lead on the back half of the game.
Into a very aggressive opponent, she's a ridiculous landmine of mortal wounds. That makes her ALWAYS a very strong consideration. Emperor's Grace alone is enough utility to potentially be worth cutting the dogmata and some upgrades.
I like the Morvenn Celestine combo in general, largely because of how is messes with opponent's perspective on how much damage they've done. "Oh, I killed all but a handful of the Zephyrim, I'm in the clear!' Doublefight Morvenn wastes 2 full squads. But I concede that Morvenn could be replaced by a Palantine in either list and that might potentially be more efficient.
U02dah4 wrote: If your going ooml you want the mortal wound sword cannonness its the best thing about ooml.
I'd probably drop the dogmata. While you want 2bss and 1 Novitiate regardless. Even if it's just because they are great bodyguard units now bodyguard doesn't work.
In both armies I'd consider swapping 1 mm rets for paragon warsuits
I think morvehn + celestine is too many points in characters but it's certainly interesting and now how I would play
Dogmata win games, and honestly, I think herohammer is where sisters are heading. I'd look to add Stern to the lists...
Dogmata is an auto include for any infantry list as far as I'm concerned. Putting obsec on repentia/zephyrim alone and handing out +1 attack or immunity to psykers.
I also really have enjoyed Celestine so far. If you use her later in the game after burning out some of our opponents units she can be really hard to deal with.
Dendarien wrote: Dogmata is an auto include for any infantry list as far as I'm concerned. Putting obsec on repentia/zephyrim alone and handing out +1 attack or immunity to psykers.
I also really have enjoyed Celestine so far. If you use her later in the game after burning out some of our opponents units she can be really hard to deal with.
Dogmata isn't as big of a deal in OoML because they have an Obsec strat. Still really good though. Nothing like making a 10 girl unit of Zephyrim count as 20 obsec models.
Dendarien wrote: Dogmata is an auto include for any infantry list as far as I'm concerned. Putting obsec on repentia/zephyrim alone and handing out +1 attack or immunity to psykers.
I also really have enjoyed Celestine so far. If you use her later in the game after burning out some of our opponents units she can be really hard to deal with.
Dogmata isn't as big of a deal in OoML because they have an Obsec strat. Still really good though. Nothing like making a 10 girl unit of Zephyrim count as 20 obsec models.
Fair enough - I still think having access to the hymns is pretty good for any order. Action and shoot aura is also occasionally useful.
-Guardsman- wrote: What's the common wisdom regarding combi-weapons on sisters superior?
My assessment is that no upgrades (chainsword are fine).
If not then the next best option is Inferno pistols because you only need one to hit in the game and you pay them all back.
Combi weapons are just a shade to expensive in an objective holder
For a conventional sister's build, the only time you would consider a combi-weapon in a competitive list is a combi-melta on a Retributor superior in a 4 Heavy Flamer loadout. 4 Heavy Flamer doesn't see much play since Admech Skiitary blobs dropped off (and now even less with AoC). Even then it was only a maybe because holy trinity is such a small damage boost in practice.
There ARE some gimmick-y meme builds that could use them though. Basically any build that uses regular Celestians sees you bring combi-meltas/plasmas to get actual damage out of those units.
Argent shroud footslog can potentially take a decent amount of combi-melta/combi-plasma without being...much worse.
Then there's the tried and (not very good) true 'max the melta' lists where you take 3 units of dominions with 5 meltas, 3 units of retributors with 4MM 1CM, and as many units of BSS you can fit with Melta, Combi-melta, multimelta.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
U02dah4 wrote: Having just had my first game with the novitiate hoard and the new rules - so much better 19-1 vs necrons.
19 victories and 1 loss? Or did you guys only score 20 objective points total?
Score difference is standardised from the normal 100 point scoring system. So that equates to a 46-50 point difference between us I maxed out at 94. Can't remember his exact without checking but I would not have come close to that before I was scraping wins with a narrow margin
Score difference is standardised from the normal 100 point scoring system. So that equates to a 46-50 point difference between us I maxed out at 94. Can't remember his exact without checking but I would not have come close to that before I was scraping wins with a narrow margin
Yeah, I think you cracked AoC before AoC was even a thing, tbh. Novitiates have such amazing board control and such a weight of dice that they're almost as good into terminators as they are into orks.
Zephyrim is still easier and cheaper to play (and paint) but it's much more feast and famine.
So, now that freeblades and armigers can be taken without breaking purity bonuses, what's the thought on knights?
We're clearly in a place where our shooting is truly abysmal if we have lists taking Paragon Warsuits as our primary shooting threat, so we're a prime candidate to benefit from knight support.
If they keep the 'counts as 5 obsec models' rule, Armigers might just end up being better than Paragons in 'flood of bodies lists' because you get more 'bodies per point'. Their output per point isn't fantastic though, so I don't know if they'd be great in kill-y lists. Moiraxes are better in shooting but again, still not world changing.
The melee variants of regular knights aren't really what we need either. We have the ability to get mediocre shooting with good melee, what we need is 'pretty good' shooting.
The Crusader has good enough shooting but is extremely expensive for it. If it can acts as enough of a distraction carnifex, it could really, really help us move the rest of the army up field.
Knight Castellan obviously has all of the juicy shooting we could ask for, but at more than 600pts...woof.
My money is on either Armigers or a Crusader being worth taking over some of our other options (maybe). A lot of that will depend on what exactly the full suite of knight strats are and the full freeblade ruleset.
I ran a castellan and sisters a lot in 8th. It certainly fills the hole of much needed long range oomph, even at 600+. We still get to cram a lot of bodies on the board with it.
U02dah4 wrote: Wait for the book we don't know statline points or even freeblade rules yet it makes it too difficult to evaluate.
Any of your evaluations of Crusaders etc are not gonna help when they could all change
Chaos knights have been mostly spoiled and not a whole lot changed with them as far as their statlines and points go, so it's fair to look at the vanilla bodies and start thinking about what they need in terms of additional rules support in order to be better than whatever 400-600pts of our army we'd be giving up for them.
Anyone have any advice on our best way to chew through Tau shield drones? I find them an incredibly frustrating game mechanic. In fact anyone who can recommend particular tactics or units against them would be much appreciated. I know we're up against it in that match up.
RE: the knights (not tactics strictly speaking) I want to see what they do with the valiant to make it a viable alternative to the castellan. I think the huge conflagration cannon is possibly the most SoB thing in 40k.
I'm also wondering if a bum-rush (forgive the turn of phrase) of close combat armigers might be a play against some of the shooty armies out there, given their speed and relative resilience, thought it'll depend on their cost.
ArikTaranis wrote: Anyone have any advice on our best way to chew through Tau shield drones? I find them an incredibly frustrating game mechanic. In fact anyone who can recommend particular tactics or units against them would be much appreciated. I know we're up against it in that match up.
RE: the knights (not tactics strictly speaking) I want to see what they do with the valiant to make it a viable alternative to the castellan. I think the huge conflagration cannon is possibly the most SoB thing in 40k.
I'm also wondering if a bum-rush (forgive the turn of phrase) of close combat armigers might be a play against some of the shooty armies out there, given their speed and relative resilience, thought it'll depend on their cost.
To deal with suits you want to force the Tau player to commit to taking saves on a suit then swap to meltas etc. For example shoot bolters or a castigator or something at the suit unit - they probably dont want to put low AP D2 weapons on a shield drone so will start taking it on a suit. Even if you don't wound the suit they still have to allocate saves to that model until it dies or the phase ends.
U02dah4 wrote: Wait for the book we don't know statline points or even freeblade rules yet it makes it too difficult to evaluate.
Any of your evaluations of Crusaders etc are not gonna help when they could all change
Chaos knights have been mostly spoiled and not a whole lot changed with them as far as their statlines and points go, so it's fair to look at the vanilla bodies and start thinking about what they need in terms of additional rules support in order to be better than whatever 400-600pts of our army we'd be giving up for them.
We know there have been changes but not to all types of knight. So what is the armiger statline
Do we know what it's point cost is has it changed same for canis rex
We know they have to be freebladrs but have those rules been changed because they were not good before.
I know what I'm looking for is something better/more durable than paragon warsuits as the one Faction I can't deal with still is nids. (Having played them twice at this weekends tournament vs a weak player I was getting a slight loss and vs a strong I'm getting a big loss
The warsuits are great as a one of but not so much as a two because anything starting on the board gets slaughtered and one is not enough
ArikTaranis wrote: Anyone have any advice on our best way to chew through Tau shield drones? I find them an incredibly frustrating game mechanic. In fact anyone who can recommend particular tactics or units against them would be much appreciated. I know we're up against it in that match up.
RE: the knights (not tactics strictly speaking) I want to see what they do with the valiant to make it a viable alternative to the castellan. I think the huge conflagration cannon is possibly the most SoB thing in 40k.
I'm also wondering if a bum-rush (forgive the turn of phrase) of close combat armigers might be a play against some of the shooty armies out there, given their speed and relative resilience, thought it'll depend on their cost.
To deal with suits you want to force the Tau player to commit to taking saves on a suit then swap to meltas etc. For example shoot bolters or a castigator or something at the suit unit - they probably dont want to put low AP D2 weapons on a shield drone so will start taking it on a suit. Even if you don't wound the suit they still have to allocate saves to that model until it dies or the phase ends.
Weight of attacks more than anything else just focus heavily on one or two areas of the board
Sisters list came in top 5 at Dallas Open. Looking at it...He definitely didn't win on the pure numerical strength of his list. Either that, or his opponents just let his repentia mulch their whole armies. I really need to watch the games. It's clearly a deathball, I just didn't ever imagine that 20 Retributors and a Castigator would somehow be core to a sister's deathball.
Detachment Command Cost
Order Convictions: Order: Bloody Rose
Stratagems +
Stratagem: Open the Reliquaries [-2CP]: 2x Additional Relics of the Ecclesiarchy
No Force Org Slot +
Repentia Superior [2 PL, 40pts]: Bolt pistol
HQ +
Canoness [5 PL, 100pts, -1CP]: Blessed Blade, Bolt pistol, Relic: Chaplet of Sacrifice, Stratagem: Saint in the Making, Warlord Trait: Blazing Ire . Word of the Emperor
Really great discussion from Jack in the stream. Keys to his victories were the consistent use of Word of the Emperor to turn off invulnerable saves against the target of a Repentia missile after hitting the ladies with Unflinching Determination. He admitted it takes tremendous planning and precise movement along with good timing to make those trades truly count, but it's really all about obsec 'em up and fire ze missiles, back to back to back.
He cites how in particular Tyranid lists he faced also couldn't easily handle 10 Retributors with AoC in cover supported by a Hospitaller without making it a terribly lopsided trade.
And of course the value of the Castigator finally makes itself known outside of John Lennon's love letters. Truly one of the most underrated units is finally seeing actual playtime on top tables, so I'm hoping the hate for it will finally subside...even though I know the zeitgeist is slow on the uptake.
Vilgeir wrote: Really great discussion from Jack in the stream. Keys to his victories were the consistent use of Word of the Emperor to turn off invulnerable saves against the target of a Repentia missile after hitting the ladies with Unflinching Determination. He admitted it takes tremendous planning and precise movement along with good timing to make those trades truly count, but it's really all about obsec 'em up and fire ze missiles, back to back to back.
He cites how in particular Tyranid lists he faced also couldn't easily handle 10 Retributors with AoC in cover supported by a Hospitaller without making it a terribly lopsided trade.
And of course the value of the Castigator finally makes itself known outside of John Lennon's love letters. Truly one of the most underrated units is finally seeing actual playtime on top tables, so I'm hoping the hate for it will finally subside...even though I know the zeitgeist is slow on the uptake.
So the repentia missile I was expecting and the 10 Retributors with AoC in cover is a specific anti-meta tech that I can get behind.
The Castigator doesn't make any sense. It's even worse now than it was before AoC. When you say 'the value of it' does he site anything specific? Because statistically, it's trash. Especially the autocannons. All of its guns put together should kill about one marine per turn. The Battle Cannon build does 4 damage to a rhino if it's lucky.There's no mathematically possible way it's worth an entire retributor squad or 3/4ths of Celestine unless he has some trick he does with it. Is wasting 3 Venom Cannon shots really that impactful?
Well, your first mistake was thinking it was there to kill Marines
It's the exact same uses I've seen John Lennon promoting it for. I suspect, given the weaponized USDA Grade A hyperbole in your hate letter up there, if he and Jack don't convince you then it's kind of not even worth thinking about. Not every tool needs to be in everyone's toolbox. I'm just taking it as a sign that I'm on the right track in my thinking if significantly way better players are seeing the same thing I did about a criminally underappreciated kit.
He gushes about it on stream. It has the mobility to grab an angle and has the range to hit targets without getting shot back by anything of real consequence. Makes an impact opening up lanes so his Repentia missiles aren't getting tossed into too many problems they can't deal with at once.
Vilgeir wrote: Well, your first mistake was thinking it was there to kill Marines
It's the exact same uses I've seen John Lennon promoting it for. I suspect, given the weaponized USDA Grade A hyperbole in your hate letter up there, if he and Jack don't convince you then it's kind of not even worth thinking about. Not every tool needs to be in everyone's toolbox. I'm just taking it as a sign that I'm on the right track in my thinking if significantly way better players are seeing the same thing I did about a criminally underappreciated kit.
He gushes about it on stream. It has the mobility to grab an angle and has the range to hit targets without getting shot back by anything of real consequence. Makes an impact opening up lanes so his Repentia missiles aren't getting tossed into too many problems they can't deal with at once.
Watched the games. It kills spore mines. He uses it to kill spore mines. That's why he brings it.
It kills drones, it kills kroot, it kills all kinds of small trash from range without trading a resource. It fulfills a role other Sister units struggle to do.
Watched the games. It kills spore mines. He uses it to kill spore mines. That's why he brings it.
Wrong again
That's what he used it for in the match ups that were streamed. So if it's not there to kill Marines and not just there to kill spore mines...think, bud. What does killin' spore mines do for the table state? What does removing them do for you, and what equivalent tools do other meta armies have that it can also eliminate? These are the questions that you'll start to see once you graduate past having issues killing Marines.
Watched the games. It kills spore mines. He uses it to kill spore mines. That's why he brings it.
Wrong again
That's what he used it for in the match ups that were streamed. So if it's not there to kill Marines and not just there to kill spore mines...think, bud. What does killin' spore mines do for the table state? What does removing them do for you, and what equivalent tools do other meta armies have that it can also eliminate? These are the questions that you'll start to see once you graduate past having issues killing Marines.
You could do the same thing with 1 Mortifier, lol. Or 110pts with a triple HB immolator. It's a pet model he brings because he likes it and it shoots 36". It fills a role, but not in a way that a different 155pts couldn't do.
Also, you're being extremely condescending for someone whose just regurgitating what top players say without a thought of your own. Maybe you should try to graduate beyond that?
So from the reveals today we now know that a new Chapter Approved is coming out soon, perhaps in the next month or so, and that the points updates in it are FINALLY going to be free online on WarCom or free through the Warhammer+ app (hype, though yes the app still sucks of course). Do we think that Sacresants are at least going to drop a bit now that they do not get AoC, maybe go back to 15 at least or hopefully all the way to 14? Additionally, do we think any other points changes might happen? Maybe Vahl is going back to around 270, and maybe Dominions go to 13 instead of 14. Alternatively I could see a possible bump to some units (like basic Sisters to 12) because of AoC. I hope overall it is a bit of a "reset" from the Warzone Nachmund points, but I know GW loves giving us buffs with a backhand of some kind, so I expect if 15 point Sacresants are coming along with 13 point Dominions, then 12 point Battle Sisters (similar to 7th) could be a thing too.
Also, do we expect any chances to our secondaries like Leap of Faith now that we got that Miracle Dice buff? Interested to hear/see what people are thinking!
I think were in a very good spot at the moment with AoC. Pretty much the only way you can go wrong right now is to take sacreasents(and maybe the exorcist).
Pretty much everything else seems decent. As for Orders, Bloody Rose looks really good, VH looks good, and OoML looks good.
Leap of faith is now pretty much an auto include and has to be one of the easier faction secondaries in the game now to score well. It's trivially easy to score 10 and it doesn't compete with the good secondary categories.
At this point, I only hope the new points values for all armies are based on army and unit performance the 1-4 preceding months rather than those points value revisions being published in the next war zone after Nephilim.
Punisher wrote: I think were in a very good spot at the moment with AoC. Pretty much the only way you can go wrong right now is to take sacreasents(and maybe the exorcist).
Pretty much everything else seems decent. As for Orders, Bloody Rose looks really good, VH looks good, and OoML looks good.
Leap of faith is now pretty much an auto include and has to be one of the easier faction secondaries in the game now to score well. It's trivially easy to score 10 and it doesn't compete with the good secondary categories.
+1 to hit and not being wounded on 1,2 minoris is also pretty strong
Punisher wrote: I think were in a very good spot at the moment with AoC. Pretty much the only way you can go wrong right now is to take sacreasents(and maybe the exorcist).
Pretty much everything else seems decent. As for Orders, Bloody Rose looks really good, VH looks good, and OoML looks good.
Leap of faith is now pretty much an auto include and has to be one of the easier faction secondaries in the game now to score well. It's trivially easy to score 10 and it doesn't compete with the good secondary categories.
+1 to hit and not being wounded on 1,2 minoris is also pretty strong
The "crappy Transhuman" trait is a trap; it has no effect at all unless your opponent is shooting a S6+ weapon at you, and even if they are it only reduces the likelihood of a successful wound from 5/6 to 4/6 (a 20% reduction). Not worth one of our trait slots IMO.
If for some reason you want to go Minoris, take the +1 to hit and Guided by the Emperor's Will; +1 to hit in melee is pretty nice on Repentia or Zephyrim (and even Sacresants although they can already get it with a strat), and the ability to reroll a hit or wound can make our shooting that little bit better, and it works decently on melee units too.
+1 to hit is great in novitiates and paragons where it is as effective as the BR +1A
And yes 20% survivability boost is strong in our toughest matchups like nids. It is also good in melee SM/Custodes/IK if that's any good when it comes out and even tau
Emperor's Will is negligible your rolling 30 dice hitting with 20 rerolling 1 increase your successful hits by 2/3rds of 1 hit or about 1%
U02dah4 wrote: +1 to hit is great in novitiates and paragons where it is as effective as the BR +1A
And yes 20% survivability boost is strong in our toughest matchups like nids. It is also good in melee SM/Custodes/IK if that's any good when it comes out and even tau
Emperor's Will is negligible your rolling 30 dice hitting with 20 rerolling 1 increase your successful hits by 2/3rds of 1 hit or about 1%
It's really only usefull on melta spam
I have been pretty much only playing Crusade the last month or two and have been using Guided by the Emperor's Will and the Righteous Suffering (mini transhuman) traits for my custom Order. Narratively they contain Sisters formerly of the Ebon Chalice and Valorous Heart so both those traits seemed like the fluffiest to use, but I have actually gone undefeated so far so it is definitely a combo that can work. Granted, I have only faced Daemons, Death Guard, Deathwatch, and a few flavors of chaos marines (not the new codex obviously) so the sample size is not really THAT competitive.
Going forward in more casual competitive matches I definitely want to try the +1 to hit in melee with Emperor's Will convictions combo though just to give my Repentia and Zephyrim a boost. I also end up taking more vehicles than I probably should even in competitive matches so that reroll to hit or wound can really help on a Castigator or an Exorcist (though with all the changes I agree that my poor baby might be seeing the shelf again unless I am playing very narrative games). Not saying the minoris convictions are great by any stretch of the imagination, but I do think there are still some interesting combos (beyond Emperor's Will and Raging Fervor melta spam) that can reasonably work for us.
We are definitely strong right now, pretty much back in at least low A tier if not a little higher, so if we do receive any points buffs (and not too many points nerfs) in the new Nephilim supplement/CA (whatever it is) I think we will be set for at least the rest of the year (as long as Nids get toned down a little in a few months).
So looking at the 40k fight club stats, I was definitely wrong in saying the dataslate was an overall nerf.
I still contend that AoC isn't as big of a change for us as people say it is, but our matchup into nids being reasonable (we're actually top half of factions because we manage to win 33%) and Tau/Harlies being reigned in a little bit were so massive for us it kind of overshadowed any and all effect of AoC. Also the extra miracle dice put pretty much every sisters list on 12VP to start thanks to leap.
We are also dead in the center of the winrate vs representation chart. We are the perfect army. All should strive to be as we are.
As far as subfactions go, only Bloody Rose really has enough of a sample size to draw reasonable conclusions (167 games) and their 56% winrate is encouraging.
Valorous heart is the next most represented, but is not doing anywhere near as well(48% winrate on 64 games). This is in line with what I predicted at least as far as subfactions go so I wasn't totally in the weeds. Rerolling wounds isn't really necessary against us and losing it doesn't really punish armies very much. Nids mostly going in on mortal wounds and wounding us on 2s a lot of the time is also big.
Our Martyrd Lady (in my opinion the only other viable option after BR) is showing a very respectable 63% winrate. However, that's only over 27 games so any data you draw there would only consist of what...5 different players? We'll see if it starts to catch on more as people realize just how good Junith is with AoC.
Exluding armies that don't list their subfactions, Argent Shroud is the only other Order with even mediocre data (25 games) and they're doing terrible (36% winrate). Trying to outgun top tier shooting armies with post-6th nerf retributors and overpriced Paragon warsuits wasn't ever really going to work. Props to the brave souls that tried it.
And generally you want melee weapons. Autoguns suck
The banner is the only option worth taking
If your spamming them you could use an imagifier instead of the banners
Powersword on the superior is decent. 4 attacks S4 Ap-4 isn't bad if you have 5 points left over. Only in Bloody Rose though.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
U02dah4 wrote: Might not be 5 could be one playing twice. I'd be surprised if ML was consistently that high.
I still think minoris is a shout but they don't really have the sample size.
There's no way OoML is actually a 63% winrate. That's purely a sample size problem. I wouldn't be surprised if they level out at about the same point as BR does though.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Something I noticed looking at 40k stats:
Sisters have a 51% winrate according to 40k stats. However, we're clearly scrapping out those wins to unmentionable degree.
If you look at our average VP (65) vs our opponents average VP (85) one of two things becomes clear, either 1. The data is wrong. Or 2. When we lose we get obliterated.
We have BY FAR the biggest negative VP disparity of any faction in the top 25. Double the next highest (genestealers). We actually have a worse VP disparity than Guard do.
I can only speak from my experience and I am not an avg level player
A lot depends on how you code games
Under w/l my last 5 results LWLLW but under WTC scoring it was DWDLW my point being that with how I play it is really close games.
I would also note that of the 3 losses 2 were Nids players who finished top 8 and the third was the highest ranked tau player (I had really unfortunate pairings or fortunate as close games are the most fun).
The problem I see is that I can't beat nids and unless you have a bad tau player it's a real struggle if they go first other than that it's small wins all the way
BR lists seem a lot more swingy especially on losses they don't have the resilience especially going second and are not going to be forgiving to a weaker player the swingyness was the reason I stopped playing them
I also would note that data wise due to the number of BR games compared to others the BR data will over power the other results
ERJAK wrote: [Something I noticed looking at 40k stats:
Sisters have a 51% winrate according to 40k stats. However, we're clearly scrapping out those wins to unmentionable degree.
If you look at our average VP (65) vs our opponents average VP (85) one of two things becomes clear, either 1. The data is wrong. Or 2. When we lose we get obliterated.
We have BY FAR the biggest negative VP disparity of any faction in the top 25. Double the next highest (genestealers). We actually have a worse VP disparity than Guard do.
So yeah, data's probably entered wrong.
Could be bad data. Could be Win Small, Lose Big. That being said, the amount of the disparity is a bit odd.
The other option is a small subset of players regularly winning but a large group of players losing big like you used to see in ork data ( a high skill threshold)
ERJAK wrote: [Something I noticed looking at 40k stats:
Sisters have a 51% winrate according to 40k stats. However, we're clearly scrapping out those wins to unmentionable degree.
If you look at our average VP (65) vs our opponents average VP (85) one of two things becomes clear, either 1. The data is wrong. Or 2. When we lose we get obliterated.
We have BY FAR the biggest negative VP disparity of any faction in the top 25. Double the next highest (genestealers). We actually have a worse VP disparity than Guard do.
So yeah, data's probably entered wrong.
Could be bad data. Could be Win Small, Lose Big. That being said, the amount of the disparity is a bit odd.
So to thought exercise it out:
You play 10 games. You win 5, your opponent's win 5 (approximately correct winrate) All of their wins are 100pts, all of their losses are 70pts. That averages out to 85pts and is the broadest distribution you can do because you're dealing with 5 perfect wins.
For you to win 5 games but still average 65pts, let's make it easy and say all 5 wins are ALSO perfect 100s. That would mean that all 5 losses would need to be 30pts. So every win you have would be 100-70 and every loss would be 30-100.
So it's absolutely possible to win that many games and still have that terrible of a point differential, but it means incredibly narrow victories and insanely onesided blowouts almost across the board. It also means that our average VP scored would be less than our opponents VP scored in their average loss, which is pretty funny.
Now, extrapolating this out a bit (and adding in some additional stats from the 40k Dashboard thing) we can draw some EXTREMELY tentative conclusions:
1. Sisters of Battle are NOT winning through overpowering their opponents. Not ever. Just about every fight is a nail biter. This likely means that learning good objective play is your only real route to victory. We're not Nids who can just table people and move on.
2. Sisters of Battle are extremely poor at denying their opponent's scoring. If our opponents are averaging 85VP despite losing 52% of their games, clearly this is a major problem for us.
3. Any future buffs we might receive (not that we necessarily will) are likely going to be eaten up here, rather than in winrates. Point drops to overpriced units like Paragons, Dominions, Sacresants, Armorium Cherubs, The Triumph, Castigators, Exorcists, celestians, dialogus, Mortifiers, Penitent engines (seriously, compare a Bonesword Deathspitter Warrior to a Mortifier/pengine. It's horrifying), arcoflagellants, the battle sanctum, or the Immolator, will be seen more raising the floor than the ceiling.
Clarifying that this data only represents March 31st to May 19th. Data going to the beginning of the year is much less skewed.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
U02dah4 wrote: The other option is a small subset of players regularly winning but a large group of players losing big like you used to see in ork data ( a high skill threshold)
It's definitely possible. The stats sort of back it up too. Admech and Deathwatch are the only armies that have a worse VP differential and they have an even higher skillgap between veteran and casual players.
That said, that's out of less total games between BOTH factions and neither has a 40% or better winrate in the same time period. So even then, we're still a very unique case.
ERJAK wrote: So looking at the 40k fight club stats, I was definitely wrong in saying the dataslate was an overall nerf.
I still contend that AoC isn't as big of a change for us as people say it is, but our matchup into nids being reasonable (we're actually top half of factions because we manage to win 33%) and Tau/Harlies being reigned in a little bit were so massive for us it kind of overshadowed any and all effect of AoC. Also the extra miracle dice put pretty much every sisters list on 12VP to start thanks to leap.
We are also dead in the center of the winrate vs representation chart. We are the perfect army. All should strive to be as we are.
As far as subfactions go, only Bloody Rose really has enough of a sample size to draw reasonable conclusions (167 games) and their 56% winrate is encouraging.
Valorous heart is the next most represented, but is not doing anywhere near as well(48% winrate on 64 games). This is in line with what I predicted at least as far as subfactions go so I wasn't totally in the weeds. Rerolling wounds isn't really necessary against us and losing it doesn't really punish armies very much. Nids mostly going in on mortal wounds and wounding us on 2s a lot of the time is also big.
Our Martyrd Lady (in my opinion the only other viable option after BR) is showing a very respectable 63% winrate. However, that's only over 27 games so any data you draw there would only consist of what...5 different players? We'll see if it starts to catch on more as people realize just how good Junith is with AoC.
Exluding armies that don't list their subfactions, Argent Shroud is the only other Order with even mediocre data (25 games) and they're doing terrible (36% winrate). Trying to outgun top tier shooting armies with post-6th nerf retributors and overpriced Paragon warsuits wasn't ever really going to work. Props to the brave souls that tried it.
So...does this mean we are good again? Honestly while I am a competitively-minded player I have only really participated in FLGS tournaments. While I have usually placed reasonably well (Top 4 usually with a 3rd or 2nd place finish) I also have traditionally played VH or even Minoris Convictions (though this also means almost nothing because the last local Tournaments I played in were in 2018 with the bet codex and before that the index rules). I have been thinking of going back to the local tournament scene so I want to see how much of a chance I have if I am not playing BR or OoML, which seems to be about 48% lol. My meta is all over the place but I can confirm that the Tyranids players in my area are pretty few and far between (at least for now).
I personally just really do not enjoy playing BR or OoML and despite loving to win tournament games I am primarily there to enjoy what I am playing, so at this point I just hope that the other major Orders get some kind of supplement either by the end of 9th or in early 10th. The various data is incredibly interesting, but it does suck that we may just be getting obliterated when we do lose. Win small and lose big just feels like a mixed bag, so I hope it may be poor data entry.
Does anybody have some general tips for getting the most out of our miracle dice?
I've played a few games and so far I feel that I haven't been effectively utilizing them, admittedly one of the games I rolled mostly twos. Often I've ended games with a whole lot of unused miracle dice, especially 2s, 3s, and 4s. I can see the moment of grace and faith & fury can be really clutch stratagems, and miraculous abilities too.
I don't really have a feel for how long to save 6s for, for instance, or whether the litanies relic is a good purchase. It seems to me the best general uses are auto passing charge rolls and using 5s or 6s for damage rolls for melta weapons.
To me, the best use is to save two dice that add up to 9 in order to auto-pass a charge roll from reserves. Having a 6 squirreled away for a melta damage roll is sometimes nice as well (or you could use it to pass a save that you would have otherwise most likely failed). 1's are useful to auto-pass Morale, and even 2's could work for that provided you didn't lose too many models from a squad. That's probably the best way to make A Leap of Faith work.
Honestly I'm not sure I use them to the fullest either, but those are my main uses for them.
The best use for them is leap of faith which you should be maxing every game
The second best use is miracle abilities which are essential at competative level
Then auto chargeing/ guaranteeing an advance to an objective
Getting a 6 on a melta role
And if you have spare bringing a character back from the dead
As to Leap of faith remember you can still use your low dice to fail I quite often use a 1 or a 2 for saving throw on a squad that has taken more than enough hits to be wiped just to use the dice
I have not been able to utilize my Miraculous Abilities to full affect in almost any game of 9th so far. I usually bring Emperor's Grace to deny reroll and then sometimes Rapturous Blows or even Word of the Emperor but ever since the codex came out I just feel like I am under utilizing those abilities. Honestly my most effective uses with Emperor's Grace were back before the VH change where I would just have a tarpit Canoness with the 5+++ VH WT and then the auto transhuman relic that adds to wounds and save (Surplice of St Istalea?) along with the d3 wounds back each turn. At least against some semi-competitive opponents I was able to just tarpit units of big melee threats, and then casually she was just holding back Sanguinary Guard and other somewhat "scary" melee units.
Any advice on using the Miraculous effects in the best way possible though would be great. It could be that sometimes my deployment is just off, either I am not placing my Canoness or Palatine in the center of enough units for the defensive buff to work, or they are not charging along with Repentia/Sacresants/other melee threats to get enough use out of Rapturous or Word.
U02dah4 wrote:The best use for them is leap of faith which you should be maxing every game
The second best use is miracle abilities which are essential at competative level
Then auto chargeing/ guaranteeing an advance to an objective
Getting a 6 on a melta role
And if you have spare bringing a character back from the dead
As to Leap of faith remember you can still use your low dice to fail I quite often use a 1 or a 2 for saving throw on a squad that has taken more than enough hits to be wiped just to use the dice
To expand upon this, there is a general hierarchy of miracle dice value:
1. Leap of Faith: Especially for low dice, there is NO more valuable use for a miracle dice than getting leap of Faith (which you should just bolt onto your list) to 12. After 12 then you move down the chart. 2. For any dice of 1, passing a morale check. It's the only thing a 1 does so if you're not using it for leap, use it for attrition. 3. Guaranteeing a Charge 4. Guaranteeing a kill by modifying the damage roll. (note this includes triggering abilities that are guaranteed to kill a valuable target) 5. Guaranteeing survival of a valuable model (vehicle/character or battle sister capturing an objective) Note that this includes Moment of Grace and Divine Intervention. 6. Using a miraculous ability. Generally not a great way to spend a 6 if you handle your movement well, but absolutely the best way to spend a 2. 7. Guaranteeing an important advance. 8. Guaranteeing a high damage roll. 9. Guaranteeing a successful save in a non-pivotal moment. 10. Using a 6 on a hit roll with a 6 trigger to also guarantee a 6 trigger on the wound roll (i.e. The Passion+Blade of Sacrifice) with Faith and Fury. 11. Using a 6 on a hit roll with a 6 trigger that's relevant (Celestine, Morvenn) 12. Succeeding a wound. 13. Succeeding a hit.
GFdoubles wrote:I have not been able to utilize my Miraculous Abilities to full affect in almost any game of 9th so far. I usually bring Emperor's Grace to deny reroll and then sometimes Rapturous Blows or even Word of the Emperor but ever since the codex came out I just feel like I am under utilizing those abilities. Honestly my most effective uses with Emperor's Grace were back before the VH change where I would just have a tarpit Canoness with the 5+++ VH WT and then the auto transhuman relic that adds to wounds and save (Surplice of St Istalea?) along with the d3 wounds back each turn. At least against some semi-competitive opponents I was able to just tarpit units of big melee threats, and then casually she was just holding back Sanguinary Guard and other somewhat "scary" melee units.
Any advice on using the Miraculous effects in the best way possible though would be great. It could be that sometimes my deployment is just off, either I am not placing my Canoness or Palatine in the center of enough units for the defensive buff to work, or they are not charging along with Repentia/Sacresants/other melee threats to get enough use out of Rapturous or Word.
Thanks in advance!
So remember that the Miraculous Abilities are declared during your Command phase and basically become an aura until the start of your NEXT command phase. That means you have plenty of time to plan out your movement phase to best get value out of it. It also means that you should start planning for it the turn BEFORE you use it. ESPECIALLY the offensive ones.
For the two offensive abilities, if you want to use them turn 2, you need to have your plan fully dialed in at the end of your turn 1 movement phase. Rapturous Blows and Word of the Emperor both benefit a lot from extra attacks and rerolls. You want to put yourself in a position where multiple units are are being affected who are as buffed up as you can get them. Make sure characters like Vahl or Junith (if you're OoML) are in range to put their buffs on something valuable (a big squad of Zephyrim, a fully kitted squad of noviates, literally any amount of repentia.) Also, you should ALWAYS be using Fiery Oratory in conjunction with either ability because A. It guarantees that war hymn will be active and B. Allows you to reposition before you need to cast it.
Remember that these abilities only effect <Order> units, so using Celestine or Stern to absorb overwatch is always a great idea to maximize the number of models benefiting. Also, if you are running Celestine, using Suffering and Sacrifice to screw over potential interrupts can keep your rapturous units (especially the Canoness/Palantine herself) safe.
For the defensive buffs, that's a bit harder. The obvious answer is to ball up turn 1 and weather shooting for a turn 2 charge. Not always going to work out the way you hope and not usually as efficient as making good use of obscuring terrain. Try to avoid using it as a 'neener, neener, neener, you can't hit me!' thing because quite a lot of armies can still toast you through it.
As long as you're using the Miraculous ability in a way that guarantees or near guarantees a positive VP swing (for example, getting your own stranglehold while the extra resilience denies your opponents) or using it to setup for a hammer blow (keeping your deathball alive long enough to pull off a big WoD turn) you should be fine.
Finally, as much as you should try to plan ahead to maximize value, don't be afraid to use them in less optimal situations that score you VP . Using Emperor's grace to keep a 5 girl sacresant squad alive on an objective to deny your opponent hold more and get you hold 2 is a 8 VP swing despite the ability only effecting 2 units. Using Rapturous Blows to guarantee your Zephyrim clear off your opponent's obsec to grab strangelhold, deny hold more, and get 2 primary off Secure the sanctuaries is a 9 VP swing, again, only affecting 2 units.
TLDR: Plan Ahead, swing for the fences if you can, don't be afraid to bunt if it scores you points.
So a new round of data is up on 40k Fight Club, let's check out how we're doing post Nids FAQ.
First, this data only represents 127 games so far. That wouldn't be enough for me to be confident in drawing strong conclusions for a single faction, let alone the whole army. All data should be taken with a pinch of salt and will likely change drastically as events continue.
Bloody Rose is sitting at 56% winrate with 98 games played, including a 64% winrate against Nids across 11 games! Unfortunately that's at the cost of a whopping 18% winrate against asuryani. If you can dodge eldar, the world is your oyster. BR have positive winrates into every other faction except Harlequins and Custodes (minimum 4 games).
Argent shroud climbed up to a 47% winrate across 19 games. Hard to draw any specific conclusions considering they played pretty much every faction at least once. Pretty good into Custodes with a 67% winrate.
Ebon Chalice makes a surprise appearence with a 68% winrate across 19 games. Specifically interesting because that includes an 80% winrate over Asuryani and a 50/50 split against Custodes. Being better into Eldar comes at the cost of being much worse than BR into Nids.
The others were all 10 games or less so drawing conclusions is even more dubious.
Well Ebon Chalice is honestly my favorite Major Order to play (though I still prefer playing with custom order traits of course). So I will be interested to see if they stay even remotely near that winrate and hopefully start to do more of a 50/50 split against Tyranids.
Glad to see that BR is at least doing well against the biggest of the scary matchups, though the Eldar matchup results are a bit disheartening so far. Also nice to see AS being even better against Custodes than BR as of this moment.
I know we can't draw too much from all this but regardless it is nice to see that we are doing pretty well still.
Also thanks for the advice on the Miraculous abilities above! One of the hardest things I am dealing with still is just popping them in the Command Phase honestly. I almost wish they happened at the end of the movement phase or something (though I know this would cause other problems). I just often have the characters with them in transports of some kind in casual games (yes I know, usually I don't bring transports for my characters but in certain narrative based games or crusade matches I do) and when they are actually on the table for it I just find them out of place and even a movement phase afterward to get them into position sometimes isn't enough. Still though, your suggestions will help me!
Sisters Melee Skew – Bloody Rose drops a 5-1 with a 20 of battle sisters, 2 squads of Novitiates, 10 Zephyrim, 30 Arco Flagellants and 2×10 Repentia. Celestine and Stern provide some back up heavy hitters and Vahl is notably riding the bench. The whole list is pure meta call that absolutely worked out for him. His best anti-tank is CELESTINE, so the list was built entirely to beat Craftworld eldar and less control focused nid lists. Fortunately for him, he played those types of armies 4 out of 6 rounds. The only other armies he played against were deathguard (who are easy for a list like this to outmanuever) and Custodes (who dumpstered him round 1)
The 20 of BSS is less and less surprising as the objective control the unit offers, combined with being able to Transhuman T3 models, makes it very hard for both Nids and Harlequins to shift economically.
The list is interesting because against armies like Eldar or Harlies, it's pure aggro. Against armies like deathguard, it's never going to kill anything so it's pure objective play. This was definitely a list of the moment that was played very well, so don't go buy too many boxes of arcos just yet.
The 13th place list in alberta was pretty standard.
War Calls GT saw a VERY standard Bloody Rose list absolutely decimate Orkz in the finals.
Looking at his final schedule, the matchups weren't bad, but basically everybody he played ended top 16 and he SHELLACKED every round, nearly maxing out his score several times and never letting an opponent get within 20VP. Props to the guy, he played a picture perfect event.
Eldenfirefly wrote: Hmmm, sisters are doing really well! What changed for sisters? Was it armor of contempt? I don't remember they got any buffs other than that.
I'm a bit biased but I feel like AoC isn't the biggest contributor to our current success (as can be seen by the preponderance of repentia). In my opinion our 3 big changes are:
1. The extra miracle dice we get per battle round means that basically ANY list can get 12pts on leap of faith and there's nothing your opponent can do about it.
2. The nerfs to indirect fire mean we don't auto-lose to Tau anymore and other factions with good non-LoS shooting are disinclined to actually bring them. Nothing feths over a sisters player harder than ignoring LoS
3. We actually have a surprisingly decent matchup into nids. They're obviously stronger than us, but we have tools to handle their psychic as well as being able to deal with warrior/raveners/harpies easier than a lot of other factions. The issue is we can't deal with all of them at once. Still, relatively higher winrate means we go up the rankings.
So I see people take Chaplet of Sacrifice on Canonesses a lot.
I get why. Divine intervention lets you use the fight on death ability twice, potentially. I'm just not sure that in addition to getting Martyrdom for free is really worth it?
It makes me think people are using it for divine intervention and you very explicitly can't use Chaplet's free strat for that.
1) you get to reroll hits (including your pistol) which is always a nice buff.
2) I Often use the stratagem for extra miracle dice when my warlord dies. This saves you the CP.. if I would be doing that anyway and I'm taking another relic way not get some free buffs for the same price
Eldenfirefly wrote: Hmmm, sisters are doing really well! What changed for sisters? Was it armor of contempt? I don't remember they got any buffs other than that.
I'm a bit biased but I feel like AoC isn't the biggest contributor to our current success (as can be seen by the preponderance of repentia). In my opinion our 3 big changes are:
1. The extra miracle dice we get per battle round means that basically ANY list can get 12pts on leap of faith and there's nothing your opponent can do about it.
2. The nerfs to indirect fire mean we don't auto-lose to Tau anymore and other factions with good non-LoS shooting are disinclined to actually bring them. Nothing feths over a sisters player harder than ignoring LoS
3. We actually have a surprisingly decent matchup into nids. They're obviously stronger than us, but we have tools to handle their psychic as well as being able to deal with warrior/raveners/harpies easier than a lot of other factions. The issue is we can't deal with all of them at once. Still, relatively higher winrate means we go up the rankings.
I think that's more of a build point the B/R lists fight well into nids the board control lists don't but the board control lists are better in other match ups such as aeldari. Nids will likely be nerfed soon and that probably favours board control in the longer term.
U02dah4 wrote: 1) you get to reroll hits (including your pistol) which is always a nice buff.
2) I Often use the stratagem for extra miracle dice when my warlord dies. This saves you the CP.. if I would be doing that anyway and I'm taking another relic way not get some free buffs for the same price
Eldenfirefly wrote: Hmmm, sisters are doing really well! What changed for sisters? Was it armor of contempt? I don't remember they got any buffs other than that.
I'm a bit biased but I feel like AoC isn't the biggest contributor to our current success (as can be seen by the preponderance of repentia). In my opinion our 3 big changes are:
1. The extra miracle dice we get per battle round means that basically ANY list can get 12pts on leap of faith and there's nothing your opponent can do about it.
2. The nerfs to indirect fire mean we don't auto-lose to Tau anymore and other factions with good non-LoS shooting are disinclined to actually bring them. Nothing feths over a sisters player harder than ignoring LoS
3. We actually have a surprisingly decent matchup into nids. They're obviously stronger than us, but we have tools to handle their psychic as well as being able to deal with warrior/raveners/harpies easier than a lot of other factions. The issue is we can't deal with all of them at once. Still, relatively higher winrate means we go up the rankings.
I think that's more of a build point the B/R lists fight well into nids the board control lists don't but the board control lists are better in other match ups such as aeldari. Nids will likely be nerfed soon and that probably favours board control in the longer term.
Eldar are likely to get nerfed also. If you look at the stats, the only thing keeping Eldar out of the 65+% winrate range is their 35% winrate matchup into nids. If they hit nids without hitting Eldar or Harlies again, we end up in the same place we're at now.
ERJAK wrote: So I see people take Chaplet of Sacrifice on Canonesses a lot.
I get why. Divine intervention lets you use the fight on death ability twice, potentially. I'm just not sure that in addition to getting Martyrdom for free is really worth it?
It makes me think people are using it for divine intervention and you very explicitly can't use Chaplet's free strat for that.
Chaplet pairs very well with Word of the Emperor. Even if your opponent kills her in melee in the turn she popped the aura the aura won't go away until the end of the turn.
Mostly standard list with a couple of interesting optimizations:
No Novitiates is interesting, apparently just not good enough over BSS. 2 Squads of repentia is on the small side and no Repentia Superior means that the 10 girl squad is going in the Rhino Every time, the 5 girl squad is almost certainly being outflanked. Same with the min Ret squad. Only reason you'd put a handflamer on them.
Paragons are interesting. They're replacing the 10 girl Ret squad a lot of BR armies have flexed into. Not my favorite choice but seems to have worked out here.
Celestine+Morvenn. I knew I wasn't insane for thinking they still worked really well together! Celestine is a crazy disruption piece if your movement phase clean enough and Morvenn's reroll ability will always be great.
My absolute favorite piece, though, is the 2 Mortifiers. I said a long time ago that 2 Mortifiers would work as an arguably superior replacement to the Castigator as a long range chaff clear option and it looks like this guy agrees!
I wonder how much use he gets out of the hospitaller? Seems a tad optimistic to me.
If my eyes don't deceive me, this is the BAO Winner list and Sisters had a win-rate over 50% at the event.
That Hospitaller must be doing something right since it could have easily been replaced by a Repentia Superior, who has an obvious use.
And it is interesting that the list went heavy into jump troops. That combined with the heavy elements in Vahl, Paragons, and Mortifiers must be the strategy that brought victory.
alextroy wrote: If my eyes don't deceive me, this is the BAO Winner list and Sisters had a win-rate over 50% at the event.
That Hospitaller must be doing something right since it could have easily been replaced by a Repentia Superior, who has an obvious use.
And it is interesting that the list went heavy into jump troops. That combined with the heavy elements in Vahl, Paragons, and Mortifiers must be the strategy that brought victory.
I'm working on a write up for an RTT I went to with THIRTY Zephyrim, and let me tell you, them girls SLAP. My Zephyrim squads were picking up whole units against Orkz, Eldar, and Harlequins. I had 2 units of Zephyrim completely wipe out 2 full units of maxed out Ork Warbikers in the same round. I wasn't even bloody rose!
Two units of 6 Zephyrim in bloody rose will handle basically any 1 wound infantry in the game while being able to take big chunks out of MEQ statlines as well.
alextroy wrote: If my eyes don't deceive me, this is the BAO Winner list and Sisters had a win-rate over 50% at the event.
That Hospitaller must be doing something right since it could have easily been replaced by a Repentia Superior, who has an obvious use.
And it is interesting that the list went heavy into jump troops. That combined with the heavy elements in Vahl, Paragons, and Mortifiers must be the strategy that brought victory.
I'm working on a write up for an RTT I went to with THIRTY Zephyrim, and let me tell you, them girls SLAP. I wasn't even Bloody Rose and my Zephyrim squads were picking up whole units against Orkz, Eldar, and Harlequins. I had 2 units of Zephyrim completely wipe out 2 full units of maxed out Ork Warbikers in the same round. I wasn't even bloody rose!
Two units of 6 Zephyrim in bloody rose will handle basically any 1 wound infantry in the game while being able to take big chunks out of MEQ statlines as well.
That's what I've been saying! Zephyrim are the new Sacresants! With 3 attacks apiece they don't need to be BR, but they really pump out numbers if they are. In one event last year I ran a 10-girl brick (as BR) and enjoyed my opponents eyes getting wide as they said, "They get HOW many attacks?!" Especially funny when I started tallying up how many bonus hits I got from The Passion...
That sounds more like your opponents miss playing because they didn't know there value. Their not much tougher than bss and a lot more expensive and hard to hide sure they hit ok but they go down quickly and are not cost effective defensively
U02dah4 wrote: That sounds more like your opponents miss playing because they didn't know there value. Their not much tougher than bss and a lot more expensive and hard to hide sure they hit ok but they go down quickly and are not cost effective defensively
If people are keeping footslog repentia alive long enough to make good trades, it's not that farfetched to do something vaguely similar with Zephyrim.
A unit of 10 Zephyrim with light cover and Indomitable belief are the same resilience as VH Sacresants pre-AoC (yunno, the only thing that could survive tau shooting long enough to be a decent contender?). They're by no means invincible , but played smartly they last longer than you think. All my Zephyrim squads were outside of LoS turn one and using obscuring terrain to divide the board and avoid eating more enemy fire than I had to. The times I did screw up my movement/deployment I lost entire squads, but so long as I was cagey and thinking ahead, I was able to minimize losses enough.
After that it was just taking good trades. I went down on points early in the two games I won (and the game I lost, obviously) in order to use the Zephyrim's speed with miracle dice assisted charges to take objectives in an advantageous way. My opponent always had a choice: Don't score any VP, or feed units to the incoming Zephyrim. The only misplay my opponent's had was the Ork player leaving 2 units of bikes too close together.
Now, all that said...I did end every game with at most 5-6 Zephyrim left total. They do die to counterattacks fairly easily. But that just leaves Celestine+Morven+Junith+the Retributors to mop up. 30 was definitely too many but I think 20 or so has real legs.
Don’t want to do the math on this (a lot of variables involved), but the short range output of this squad should be pretty nasty even with the humble bolter .
20 Sacred Rose sisters with 4 ASB and 16 bolt guns.
On objective and within 12” of target (for max potential)
Defenders of the Faith strat to double shots (and bonus transhuman to stick around)
Emperor’s Judgement strat for exploding 6s to hit
War Hymn that has 6s to hit as auto wound and AP-1
Sacred Rite for additional AP-1 on 6s to wound
Either Canoness/Palatine reroll 1s or better yet Morvenn Vahl full rerolls .
That’s 32 storm bolter shots and 64 bolter shots. Lots of auto wounds on 6s as you reroll all hits that aren’t 6s to fish for more. All 6s give an additional hit plus the original that auto wounded. Rolling to wound either at AP-1 or -2 on a 6 to wound.
That’s got to leave a mark.
I’d be curious how much that would do to a T8 3+ save knight
Defenders of the Faith is not double shots. It simply lets you Rapid Fire at your full range. So all of your bolters are firing 2 shots apiece even outside of 12".
I'm debating whether to run a repentia superior with the indomitable belief trait, boosting her accompanying 10-strong repentia to a 5++ (they're one of the few units who realistically still benefit from it after AoC). Is it worth a cp, or is it a fool's errand trying to make repentia harder to kill?
ZergSmasher wrote: Defenders of the Faith is not double shots. It simply lets you Rapid Fire at your full range. So all of your bolters are firing 2 shots apiece even outside of 12".
U02dah4 wrote: I tend to find it's better on a hospitallier with the +3" range auras to maximise the units that benefit but I also play Novitiate spam.
Book is only really necessary on lists like my Zephyrim spam where you're largely after the 4++ but extending the range of the FNP is really good as well. Or if you run novitiate spam because you need to hit so many units with the 6+++.
In lists like Jesse's GT winner, Neither book or indomitable were necessary so he saved the 2CP.
Which leads into talking about the final game of that GT: The finals of the BAO was one of the ugliest games of warhammer I've ever seen. The sheer amount of exhaustion and burnout those guys were dealing with definitely fried some synapses.
The Sisters player was forgetting entire phases, the Nids player forgot an entire turn(he was convinced it was turn 4 when it was turn 5), you could see how visibly fatigued they were especially at the end.
So I want that to be the context when I mention the next bit: I can't speak for the Nids player's rules, but the SoB player used maybe 60% of his armies abilities. He forgot Word of The Emperor until his Canoness got charged turn 4, despite having no less than 3 separate occasions where it likely would have instantly won him the game. He didn't remember his exploding 6s until turn 3, he generated maybe half the miracle dice he was supposed to and completely biffed his first turn movement phase. He still won (though they almost missed 6 of his opponent's victory points because he forgot that Celestine is 3 characters.
It goes to show that 1. Even very good players make mistakes, especially when tired and 2. You can recover from mistakes you DO make if you don't just give up on it.
Speaking of mistakes, I've been reading Holy Trinity wrong this whole edition. Turns out, you don't need to SHOOT a bolt weapon, flamer weapon, and melta weapon. You just need to be EQUIPPED with them and in range. Obviously those of you who CAN read(unlike me) already know this but, Retributors are equipped with bolt Pistols so a hand flamer is all you need, even for a minimum Retributor squad.
U02dah4 wrote: I tend to find it's better on a hospitallier with the +3" range auras to maximise the units that benefit but I also play Novitiate spam.
Book is only really necessary on lists like my Zephyrim spam where you're largely after the 4++ but extending the range of the FNP is really good as well. Or if you run novitiate spam because you need to hit so many units with the 6+++.
In lists like Jesse's GT winner, Neither book or indomitable were necessary so he saved the 2CP.
Which leads into talking about the final game of that GT: The finals of the BAO was one of the ugliest games of warhammer I've ever seen. The sheer amount of exhaustion and burnout those guys were dealing with definitely fried some synapses.
The Sisters player was forgetting entire phases, the Nids player forgot an entire turn(he was convinced it was turn 4 when it was turn 5), you could see how visibly fatigued they were especially at the end.
So I want that to be the context when I mention the next bit: I can't speak for the Nids player's rules, but the SoB player used maybe 60% of his armies abilities. He forgot Word of The Emperor until his Canoness got charged turn 4, despite having no less than 3 separate occasions where it likely would have instantly won him the game. He didn't remember his exploding 6s until turn 3, he generated maybe half the miracle dice he was supposed to and completely biffed his first turn movement phase. He still won (though they almost missed 6 of his opponent's victory points because he forgot that Celestine is 3 characters.
It goes to show that 1. Even very good players make mistakes, especially when tired and 2. You can recover from mistakes you DO make if you don't just give up on it.
Speaking of mistakes, I've been reading Holy Trinity wrong this whole edition. Turns out, you don't need to SHOOT a bolt weapon, flamer weapon, and melta weapon. You just need to be EQUIPPED with them and in range. Obviously those of you who CAN read already know this but, Retributors are equipped with bolt Pistols so a hand flamer is all you need, even for a minimum Retributor squad.
I actually misread that strat too, thanks for posting, makes that a bit better
U02dah4 wrote: That sounds more like your opponents miss playing because they didn't know there value. Their not much tougher than bss and a lot more expensive and hard to hide sure they hit ok but they go down quickly and are not cost effective defensively
If people are keeping footslog repentia alive long enough to make good trades, it's not that farfetched to do something vaguely similar with Zephyrim.
A unit of 10 Zephyrim with light cover and Indomitable belief are the same resilience as VH Sacresants pre-AoC (yunno, the only thing that could survive tau shooting long enough to be a decent contender?). They're by no means invincible , but played smartly they last longer than you think. All my Zephyrim squads were outside of LoS turn one and using obscuring terrain to divide the board and avoid eating more enemy fire than I had to. The times I did screw up my movement/deployment I lost entire squads, but so long as I was cagey and thinking ahead, I was able to minimize losses enough.
After that it was just taking good trades. I went down on points early in the two games I won (and the game I lost, obviously) in order to use the Zephyrim's speed with miracle dice assisted charges to take objectives in an advantageous way. My opponent always had a choice: Don't score any VP, or feed units to the incoming Zephyrim. The only misplay my opponent's had was the Ork player leaving 2 units of bikes too close together.
Now, all that said...I did end every game with at most 5-6 Zephyrim left total. They do die to counterattacks fairly easily. But that just leaves Celestine+Morven+Junith+the Retributors to mop up. 30 was definitely too many but I think 20 or so has real legs.
The issue isn't the defence everything is squishy to the volume of fire tau/aeldari can put out. The issue is unless your modelling for advantage the Zephyrim because they are up on the flying bases and have an even taller Pennant dude are near impossible to hide if your not on an ultra dense board. A lot of the repentia models by comparison are a lot lower down and easier to hide. Defence isn't an issue when you cant see them to shoot then.
The damage output also ain't great unless your buffing it
I mean 10 is 31A hitting 0.666666 wounding a primaris on 0.5 breaking through the armour save 0.66666 =6.8 wounds or 3.5 dead primaris for 175pt unit even in BR we only get to an expectancy of 11W so you might be able to kill one primaris squad before your removed from the table any more than that and your opponent's misplaying.
U02dah4 wrote: The damage output also ain't great unless your buffing it
I mean 10 is 31A hitting 0.666666 wounding a primaris on 0.5 breaking through the armour save 0.66666 =6.8 wounds or 3.5 dead primaris for 175pt unit even in BR we only get to an expectancy of 11W so you might be able to kill one primaris squad before your removed from the table any more than that and your opponent's misplaying.
I mean sure it might fit into "buffing it" but why wouldn't you just be using the +1 to wound Zephyrim strat when it would help? It would get you 4.5 dead marines(averages 5.5 if you take the passion), and that number goes way up if they have vahl's buff. If you are bloody rose, savage twist makes them just mince primaris marines.
So the damage output is great against 1w infantry and you just need to spend some CP or use army buffs to make them good against 2w infantry.
You want to leave one Alive to wrap also I never have enough cp
Sure you could also give it rerolls of 1 in a lot of scenario's or buff from order
But just killing 10w of infantry isn't the chopping power I expect from 175pts
A lot of the time I would kill an intercessor squad and lose the Zephyrim Squad shortly after for a net loss. They need a 3 pt reduction. Doesn't mean you can't play them well their just inefficient
I mean compare their output to Crusaders same strength same ap better hit rate better inv no armour of contempt but 5+++ vs mortals and only 11pts
Sure you lose your order and 6" movement but a lot of bonus on a 6pt reduction
One thing you can do with Zephyrim is to have a 10-strong squad, give the superior the blessings of Sebastion Thor relic for 1cp (take the passion and hand of the Emperor sacred rites), and deep strike. This gives you a rerolable 8" charge, which you could use miracle dice for (bonus if you can use up two 4s).
I guess this only protects them until the first close combat, at the cost of a cp and some miracle dice, but it's a way of getting a blender squad where they need to be at full strength or close to it. Come to think of it, zephyrim are probably pretty good in Ebon Chalice, as you don't even need the relic, and you could do this with multiple squads simultaneously.
In the interest of weird assault combos, you could also do 10 death cult assassins (2 squads of 5 in a rhino) for 210 points. Bit of a risk, but you can unleash the two squads to nuke one or more enemies with a total of 40 power sword attacks, almost guaranteed to hit with 2+ rerolling.
U02dah4 wrote: That sounds more like your opponents miss playing because they didn't know there value. Their not much tougher than bss and a lot more expensive and hard to hide sure they hit ok but they go down quickly and are not cost effective defensively
If people are keeping footslog repentia alive long enough to make good trades, it's not that farfetched to do something vaguely similar with Zephyrim.
A unit of 10 Zephyrim with light cover and Indomitable belief are the same resilience as VH Sacresants pre-AoC (yunno, the only thing that could survive tau shooting long enough to be a decent contender?). They're by no means invincible , but played smartly they last longer than you think. All my Zephyrim squads were outside of LoS turn one and using obscuring terrain to divide the board and avoid eating more enemy fire than I had to. The times I did screw up my movement/deployment I lost entire squads, but so long as I was cagey and thinking ahead, I was able to minimize losses enough.
After that it was just taking good trades. I went down on points early in the two games I won (and the game I lost, obviously) in order to use the Zephyrim's speed with miracle dice assisted charges to take objectives in an advantageous way. My opponent always had a choice: Don't score any VP, or feed units to the incoming Zephyrim. The only misplay my opponent's had was the Ork player leaving 2 units of bikes too close together.
Now, all that said...I did end every game with at most 5-6 Zephyrim left total. They do die to counterattacks fairly easily. But that just leaves Celestine+Morven+Junith+the Retributors to mop up. 30 was definitely too many but I think 20 or so has real legs.
The issue isn't the defence everything is squishy to the volume of fire tau/aeldari can put out. The issue is unless your modelling for advantage the Zephyrim because they are up on the flying bases and have an even taller Pennant dude are near impossible to hide if your not on an ultra dense board. A lot of the repentia models by comparison are a lot lower down and easier to hide. Defence isn't an issue when you cant see them to shoot then.
The damage output also ain't great unless your buffing it
I mean 10 is 31A hitting 0.666666 wounding a primaris on 0.5 breaking through the armour save 0.66666 =6.8 wounds or 3.5 dead primaris for 175pt unit even in BR we only get to an expectancy of 11W so you might be able to kill one primaris squad before your removed from the table any more than that and your opponent's misplaying.
In my last tournament, two units of Zephyrim each picked up a 10 man unit of Ork Warbikers with 5++ invuls. OoML, not BR. That's 60 wounds against T5, 5++.
Saying 'they don't really kill anything unless you buff them' is very silly when taking 20-30 means you're absolutely buffing them all the time and likely have tons of buffs to give them. They ALSO have the benefit bypassing -1 damage abilities that really screw up Repentia.
They are not free win stat-sticks. You have to leverage them correctly. You have to keep track of your buffs, your auras, charge ranges, pile-in consolidate, LoS, cover, etc. But if you DO, they have the speed and output to take highly efficient trades while securing objectives your opponent might have otherwise considered safe.
If you're only taking 5-10 they do fine as mid-level chaff clearing. If you're investing enough in them for it to be worth taking 20+, then their extremely high base attack count makes them ideal buff targets.
Comparing them to Crusaders is silly. Crusaders only have 1 attack. They START at less than 40% of a Zephyrims output while also being slow and limited to a tiny unit size. That's why they're action slaves and nothing else.
A Zephyrim is eventually super deadly, a Crusader never successfully kills and intercessor. If you drop Zephyrim by 3ppm, Sisters are instantly the best army in the game. The same crap I was doing only I have 90 more points for objective grabbers and could even potentially give up some wombo for more consistency...brah.
Crusaders start 37% up and are a lot better defensively
I just don't see it I'm not saying Crusaders are the answer but they are good point for damage comparison without all the buffing and as you said their not good enough as damage dealers.
By the time you invest the resource to make zephyrim work and by that I mean medium's deadly they are even more inefficient and your almost always trading down.
Comparatively repentia will usually be trading up with the same investment
Crusaders start 37% up and are a lot better defensively
I just don't see it I'm not saying Crusaders are the answer but they are good point for damage comparison without all the buffing and as you said their not good enough as damage dealers.
By the time you invest the resource to make zephyrim work and by that I mean medium's deadly they are even more inefficient and your almost always trading down.
Comparatively repentia will usually be trading up with the same investment
If you want to see a good comparison to Crusaders, let's look at Novitiates. Worse save, worse invul, same strength but no AP to speak of, only 1 more attack, worse weapon skill, only 3.5ppm cheaper.
31 attacks at WS4+ is only 2.58 damage to a MEQ target compared to 4.16 from the same points value of crusaders. Not on the charge it's only 21 for 1.75.
That's nearly double(or more than double) the amount of wounds. So by the same logic, Novitiates are bad compared to Crusaders and by the time you put in the resources to make them not bounce off of anything with better than a 6+ save, they're even more inefficient and almost always trading down. Add in the BSS tax and realistically you're looking at 80+55=135pts of Novitiates that do less damage than 77pts of Crusaders.
Novitatiates are not a good comparison precisely because you butchered it which is embarrassing with a straw man
A unit of novitiates with banner and a unit of bss as its mandatory make 135pts 4+
5 s3 ap0 on the charge
3 s3 ap0 if not on the charge
31 s4 ap 0 on the charge
23 s4 ap 0
12 Crusaders make 132pts
Outputting 24A s4 AP3 Zealot 3+
Melee Offensively yes Crusaders are better
But the novitiates and bss have 6 Bolt guns and 9 autopistols so also put out some range
Novitiates also have built in reroll advance and charge and obsec
Defensively it's also more complex
3+ 4++ 5++ vs mortals wounds 12 w
Vs 6w 3+ 5++ ignoring an ap and 9 w 4+ 5++ ignoreing an ap
Your probably not spending cp to buff either though you can. Your also not likely to invest points in buffing either although you might do so incidentally.
In minoris +1 to hit or BR +1A are a 25% increase in output so in those orders factoring in guns 0.66 meq they are approximately equivalent output in VH the Crusaders output is higher
Defensively it's also equivalent vs ap 0,1 novitiates are better vs ap2+ or bomb type weapons Crusaders are better
Utility wise obsec +rerolls to advance and charge + Keyword is definitely in novitiates favour
and in a mandatory slot with bss as the alternative Crusaders arnt a legal option
Really this an apples and oranges comparison and that's why it takes so long and why it is a stupid one
Crusaders make a good comparison to zephyrim precisely because the s is the same, the ap is the same their both 3+ sv and they both get a small defensive buff compared to the other. Your paying 6pts a model more for equivalent defence (on a model basis making crusaders 33% better due to lowers ppm) but gaining + 6" of movement ds and a keyword and assuming your in a melee order you end up equivalent combat output wise.
You have to buff them to make them better and that takes CP which you have better uses for (repentia, paragon warsuits, domminion squad) or keeping them near your Characters which negates their movement and ds advantage
The Zephyrim profit from order conviction and sacred rites, have higher mobility and access to deepstrike, can assault units on higher floors/ in woods easily thanks to fly, have access to MD and more stratagems and are way faster - in every cc oriented order, they are superior to crusaders. The only use for crusader in my opinion is a cheap minsize unit for objective holding out of LOS...
Absolutely although that atleast gives crusaders an efficient use.i can't think of any for zephyrim.
I'm not saying Crusaders are brilliant but none of those things get over the fact that with the order Conviction zephyrim output the same damage only are defensively worse and the Crusaders are not good enough to make you want to field them in combat so neither are the Zephyrim
Zephyrim might as well not have miracle dice because if I'm miracle diceing a charge its repentia or paragons miracle diceing their charge means I'm not miracle diceing the unit that needs it and is more efficient. While miracle diceing one power sword attack is pointless. So DS chargeing is very unreliable even at 8" your gonna get blown of the table doing nothing 1 out of 3 games. Sure their speed does give them more flexibility in where they can be used but it doesn't make them efficient at that role and due to there height a main boarded unit is still vulnerable.
Which is the problem there not terrible just not efficient and having to stack buffs to get them remotely functioning just ups the opportunity costs.
The rumor is that the faction secondaries are also updated. I'm curious what they'll make out of ours. My preferred order is ebon chalice and I actually don't mind the CP reduction too much. Terrible knowledge is still an auto take and the rest is optional anyway.
Us3Less wrote: The rumor is that the faction secondaries are also updated. I'm curious what they'll make out of ours. My preferred order is ebon chalice and I actually don't mind the CP reduction too much. Terrible knowledge is still an auto take and the rest is optional anyway.
You can pretty much write Leap of Faith and Sacred Ground on all your lists now. Defend the Shrine is also really good but EbonChalice bringing way more flamers than other SoB lists means that you might have good luck with Slay the Heretic against MSU armies now.
+1 to hit on the charge charge and heroic intervention
Your girls can't be wounded on a 1 or a 2.
These are brilliant for infantry spam with the +1 to hit being as good as +1a on 4+ ws units and the other giving your girls more survivability vs s6+ A really common on melee units.
The alternative is the free reroll but that only significantly benefits melta spam.
They may be only S4, but they have a lot of attacks (especially as BR) and have a strat that isn't Order-locked for +1 to wound. They can, and do, punch above their weight.
ZergSmasher wrote: They may be only S4, but they have a lot of attacks (especially as BR) and have a strat that isn't Order-locked for +1 to wound. They can, and do, punch above their weight.
That's 2CP though. It's a lot just to boost them to a decent level.
Especially now CP is more limited.
6 CP pre +1 per turn except on certain missions where you may not get it T1 as you need to hold a neutral objective and you have to pay for all your relic warlord traits.
in reality this means -6 pregame -5 BR1 -4 BR -3 BR3 -2BR4 -1 BR1 (2 less than this if you take a relic and warlord trait and less if you need the neutral objective)
Outcome detatchment's like vanguard just seem impossible to justify and second patrols also seem impossible to justify
So in reality your looking at Battalion or Brigade
Second out come is that some units effectively have built in CP tax - do you really want Vahl without her WL trait. Now its not enough to stop you from using her but it does mean your pregame pool is smaller than 6. Now you are almost always taking leap of faith so you need beacon of faith so if you do both of those your starting at 4. Other warlord traits and relics seem a little costly I could still justify indomitable belief and book of saint lucius in some lists but that would now leave you with 2. Relics like the chaplet and iron surplus of saint istella probably have to kick the bucket.
Next problem reserves. Previously I was happy to pay 2 cp to reserve a portion of my army problem is with the new rules that mean's i'm starting with 0CP. So the amount we reserve might have to drop. Maybe entirely.
So assuming you blow your above CP or most of it you have 1-2 CP per turn
Inefficient units such as Zephyrim just wont cut the mustard you can't justify the CP to make them function. Now more than ever you will need to plan your cp. Double firing seraphim Is another drop because it isn't impactfull enough
Really the focus needs to be predominantly on units that don't need cp and are still efficient
Mission wise we have a massive boost and will likely mostly be running faction-specific secondaries
Leap is still broken
Defend the shrine is buffed in that you choose it and nerfed in that you don't score it at end game still 15 able.
Sacred grounds and slay the heretic both got buffed and are probably doable in the right build but I would side with Sacred grounds as being super strong on any mission with 5 neutral objectives or 4 neutral objectives and 6 total
Even with 3 neutrals 13 pts should often be acheivable (assuming you do all objectives except their deployment zone) and it could easily be your best choice
We also know some enemies will be hit harder especially ones that need multi detatchments but that's a more complex discussion soup however got murdered.
6 CP pre +1 per turn except on certain missions where you may not get it T1 as you need to hold a neutral objective and you have to pay for all your relic warlord traits.
in reality this means -6 pregame -5 BR1 -4 BR -3 BR3 -2BR4 -1 BR1 (2 less than this if you take a relic and warlord trait and less if you need the neutral objective)
Outcome detatchment's like vanguard just seem impossible to justify and second patrols also seem impossible to justify
So in reality your looking at Battalion or Brigade
Second out come is that some units effectively have built in CP tax - do you really want Vahl without her WL trait. Now its not enough to stop you from using her but it does mean your pregame pool is smaller than 6. Now you are almost always taking leap of faith so you need beacon of faith so if you do both of those your starting at 4. Other warlord traits and relics seem a little costly I could still justify indomitable belief and book of saint lucius in some lists but that would now leave you with 2. Relics like the chaplet and iron surplus of saint istella probably have to kick the bucket.
Next problem reserves. Previously I was happy to pay 2 cp to reserve a portion of my army problem is with the new rules that mean's i'm starting with 0CP. So the amount we reserve might have to drop. Maybe entirely.
So assuming you blow your above CP or most of it you have 1-2 CP per turn
Inefficient units such as Zephyrim just wont cut the mustard you can't justify the CP to make them function. Now more than ever you will need to plan your cp. Double firing seraphim Is another drop because it isn't impactfull enough
Really the focus needs to be predominantly on units that don't need cp and are still efficient
Mission wise we have a massive boost and will likely mostly be running faction-specific secondaries
Leap is still broken
Defend the shrine is buffed in that you choose it and nerfed in that you don't score it at end game still 15 able.
Sacred grounds and slay the heretic both got buffed and are probably doable in the right build but I would side with Sacred grounds as being super strong on any mission with 5 neutral objectives or 4 neutral objectives and 6 total
Even with 3 neutrals 13 pts should often be acheivable (assuming you do all objectives except their deployment zone) and it could easily be your best choice
We also know some enemies will be hit harder especially ones that need multi detatchments but that's a more complex discussion soup however got murdered.
There were 0 competitive sisters lists not already using battalion/brigade, so that's not a huge change.
Vahl doesn't lose much without her warlord trait. It was overkill against a lot of targets and she can still buff herself if you absolutely need her to kill something; but you bring Vahl for her buffs, not for the mediocre beatstick.
You don't need beacon to get leap, especially if you have 1-2 repentia units. If the game goes to 5 turns, you have a chance for 25 leap points. If you're not generating enough MD to get half that without a crutch like beacon, you should probably consider bringing units that can kill things. Even if you can't (and let's be clear, if you can't it's on you) score leap without beacon, you're probably better off spending 80pts on a battle sanctum that at least provides Obscuring. Beacon of Faith is completely worthless outside of just feeding one dice to leap. With how much the value of CP has gone up, Spending 80pts on obscuring and meaningful miracle dice, is likely just flat out better than spending 1CP on generating a miracle dice for your warlord's advance roll.
Reserves are a harder choice. I generally only spent 1CP on it, I might start taking 4 girl repentia squads alongside the MM Rets I usually reserve. Both will fit into 1CP and the repentia are generally good to kill one unit and generate a miracle dice.
Combining Leap being our best secondary and the rumored points drops, Novitiates are pretty much dead. They already had dubious utility as 'stand on an objective and hope you're up against a slow t3 army'. Now, unless you want to handicap yourself by wasting a CP on a garbage WT like beacon, you need units that are going to kill things. Novitiates can't handle anything tougher than a battle sister without spending 3 CP on Tear them Down, Holy Rage, and Savage twist, so they are out.
ZergSmasher wrote: They may be only S4, but they have a lot of attacks (especially as BR) and have a strat that isn't Order-locked for +1 to wound. They can, and do, punch above their weight.
That's 2CP though. It's a lot just to boost them to a decent level.
Especially now CP is more limited.
They still do better than garbage units like Novitiates. Plus, you can't beat the utility of a 12" move unit that clears chaff extremely well.
There's a reason 90% of competitive sisters list take 2 units of Zephyrim and less than 50% take even 1 unit of novitiates.
It's funny because I don't see that reflected in the Scottish meta. Especially the Zephyrim. Sure you might take a winning list copy and paste but the lists function differently. Yours was too cp reliant and I feel its gotten weaker as a result infantry spam seems stronger especially in the secondary any thought of needing an IQ has gone
Novitates are not a garbage unit and with the change in missions so your not limited to one faction secondary board control probably matters more than ever. I need to kill some things I don't need to kill everything and prior the only games I was losing were nids and I'm betting nids get a big points nerf....they are not a kill unit though they can certainly hit chaff
As to vahl buff it is often better on a supporting unit her wl is probably worth the cp so both can fight
I disagree on leap yes you can sometimes max it without I have maxed it every game with and that securityis worth it.
I also want the MD because you can use it on miraculous abilities and t1 I normally want a shield up.
Reserves wise I was doing a paragon and a dominion with some change depending on my op
I'm now wondering if an Inquisitor with the esoteric lore WT (CP regen - 5+ per opponent strat) could be a play. Trouble is, it already costs a cp to bring it in with the trait, so at best you'll gain a cp each battle round for a net of +4. I think that's fairly unrealistic though, as he'd have to survive the whole game and be lucky enough to get a 5+ roll in each round. Maybe a net gain of 2cp is more realistic, in which case it might not be worth it.
Probably I'd bring it with the castigation psychic power for a targeted 'smite'. Might all be a bit niche for 60-70 points. Thoughts?
ArikTaranis wrote: I'm now wondering if an Inquisitor with the esoteric lore WT (CP regen - 5+ per opponent strat) could be a play. Trouble is, it already costs a cp to bring it in with the trait, so at best you'll gain a cp each battle round for a net of +4. I think that's fairly unrealistic though, as he'd have to survive the whole game and be lucky enough to get a 5+ roll in each round. Maybe a net gain of 2cp is more realistic, in which case it might not be worth it.
Probably I'd bring it with the castigation psychic power for a targeted 'smite'. Might all be a bit niche for 60-70 points. Thoughts?
I think the problem you have is you might gain an avg of +2 but your unlikely to get that until later rounds when it doesn't matter. You also have less CP so that means Round 1-3 you only have 6-8 CP and thats going to limit the number of strats you can use to get the CP refunded.
ArikTaranis wrote: I'm now wondering if an Inquisitor with the esoteric lore WT (CP regen - 5+ per opponent strat) could be a play. Trouble is, it already costs a cp to bring it in with the trait, so at best you'll gain a cp each battle round for a net of +4. I think that's fairly unrealistic though, as he'd have to survive the whole game and be lucky enough to get a 5+ roll in each round. Maybe a net gain of 2cp is more realistic, in which case it might not be worth it.
Probably I'd bring it with the castigation psychic power for a targeted 'smite'. Might all be a bit niche for 60-70 points. Thoughts?
I think the problem you have is you might gain an avg of +2 but your unlikely to get that until later rounds when it doesn't matter. You also have less CP so that means Round 1-3 you only have 6-8 CP and thats going to limit the number of strats you can use to get the CP refunded.
This. I brought an Inquisitor for this one time even before the CPs went down and it was pretty underwhelming. Especially when opponents are going to be throwing around less stats anyway. Not terrible if you have another purpose for your Inquisitor but definitely not worth it just for farming.
Points are our seems a buff
-20pts triumph of Saint Katharine
-1pts per celestian
-2pts per celestian sacresant
-5pts on Penitent Engines
-2pts per Seraphim
-2pts per Zephyrim
-15pts per castigator
-10pts per exorcist
-10pts per immolator
Erjak will probably be happy at the Zephyrim that's quite a buff if you were spamming them
I think I'm dropping my domminion squad for another seraphim I might be tempted to run a Penitent engine and will definitely be dusting off my sacresants
I'm super happy about this. Was really hoping for 10ppm Battle Sisters, but I am going to be feasting on these changes regardless. Cheaper Seraphim, Zephyrim and Sacresants alone are going to be saving me like 50pts in my usual lists, even more than I was expecting. And if I feel like having fun and dust off an Exorcist, Immolator or the Triumph? Not going to sting as much as it used to. In fact, at 110-130pts and with Armour of Contempt I'd say the Immolator is making a case for itself now.
Not expecting any buffs for us in the Balance Dataslate tomorrow, but as long as we don't get a nerf then this should be plenty to tide us over.
I think the other point I'd consider is I was only losing games to TAU going first - and tyranids. Both of which got big nerfs. So it isn't just about our buffs. Only DG and BA really got buffed as much and neither was a challenge.
I just noticed that the Retributors' Simulacrum Imperialis went up to 5pts. Kind of funny since it's the one unit I'd consider putting one on, but probably won't bother now. For our only nerf though I'll take that any day.
So now that we are seeing T9 Land Raiders and T8 Predators from the new Chaos Codex, I am really thinking that GW almost has to do at least a reprint of our codex when the SM 2.0 codex comes out. The Castigator has literally been said to be our version of a Predator, therefore I expect at least that tank to be going to T8. If the Exorcist goes back to T8 at least as well that would be great but I am not hopeful of that (please give us AP -3 anti-tank missiles back at least if this does happen).
Still though, just adding in Novitiates to the book and giving Armor of Contempt to most units along with the possible update to the Castigator I think warrants at least a reprint of our codex some point in early 2023. Maybe the Tale of the Stoic gets a look at too, but I would love just a few updates if SM 2.0 is actually going to make most non-Rhino vehicles T8.
Yeah I agree that it's pretty messy with all the rules tweaks now, but I doubt we'll get a reprint. I certainly wouldn't pay for another codex just because it was cleaned up and streamlined. And certainly gw should bring our vehicles into line, and I agree 100% about the exorcist missiles.
RE: chaos, I suppose some of our niche anti chaos abilities are going to be more in the spotlight. I'm thinking about the priest pseudo smite which does a flat 3 mortal wounds to chaos, and Ephrael Sterns similar anti chaos smite buff. Pay a cp and you can auto smite abaddon in whatever phase you choose, say the psychic phase, to chip away those wounds in separate phases. You'll have to be close to him, so it's a one shot thing before you get killed.
Actually on that note, does losing mortal wounds bypass the 'ignore damage from first failed save per turn' thing?
GFdoubles wrote: So now that we are seeing T9 Land Raiders and T8 Predators from the new Chaos Codex, I am really thinking that GW almost has to do at least a reprint of our codex when the SM 2.0 codex comes out. The Castigator has literally been said to be our version of a Predator, therefore I expect at least that tank to be going to T8. If the Exorcist goes back to T8 at least as well that would be great but I am not hopeful of that (please give us AP -3 anti-tank missiles back at least if this does happen).
Still though, just adding in Novitiates to the book and giving Armor of Contempt to most units along with the possible update to the Castigator I think warrants at least a reprint of our codex some point in early 2023. Maybe the Tale of the Stoic gets a look at too, but I would love just a few updates if SM 2.0 is actually going to make most non-Rhino vehicles T8.
If anything it should go back to ap-4, it was ap1 in the old armor system for a looooong time
I'm not sure that list has an answer to knights the game roughly went knights t1 I remove 50 models - my t1 get no cp i move on to the two nearest objectives narrowly fail to kill his big knight due to bad damage rolls t2 he gets three armigers nudging my 2 objectives and I remove 50 more models my t2 get no cp kill his big knight and 2 armigers his t3 I'm basically tabled I have enough to gain a couple of leap points but that's about it
Mvp the 50 novitiates - fast at getting up to the objectives and then superb at delaying the enemy my opponent's wernt getting close to the shrine which is why it maxed except against knights ( hospitaliier with +3" +1Inv and minoris can't be wounded on 1,2 both really helping)
If anything it should go back to ap-4, it was ap1 in the old armor system for a looooong time
I agree completely with going back to AP -4 like it was at the start of 8th in the original Index and even in that atrocious beta codex (since AP -4 as you stated, correlates to AP 1 or at least it seems to be that way). However, I highly doubt we are ever seeing that again because getting 3d3 shots instead of d6 meant that it had to go down in AP as far as GW is concerned. Putting the missiles down to AP -2 though made NO sense. These are NOT krak missiles, Vahl's missile launcher is sure, but Exorcist missiles are literally "melta" level missiles that are made to crack armor. The Conflagration rockets are the anti-infantry option.
As far as a reprinted codex like I discussed, or whatever they end up doing, I really just feel like there are a few small things in our book that just do not feel like they should. Tale of the Stoic and the Exorcist are the two most glaring for me, but even Aestred Thurga, and one or two other things in the book probably need a second look. I am by no means saying we are weak, in fact according to Art of War we may very well be the top faction right now in the competitive scene, being the ONLY S tier army (which of course means we will be getting hit in a few months). However, for an edition that supposedly prides itself on :making things feel like they should on the tabletop" I would say there are definitely some questionable decisions GW made in our book. SM 2.0 should fix most of that problem with Marines, but if we get one that does the same thing, I will probably spend that money on a new book barely two years after the last one. Then again, I buy almost everything related to Sisters lol.
If anything it should go back to ap-4, it was ap1 in the old armor system for a looooong time
I agree completely with going back to AP -4 like it was at the start of 8th in the original Index and even in that atrocious beta codex (since AP -4 as you stated, correlates to AP 1 or at least it seems to be that way). However, I highly doubt we are ever seeing that again because getting 3d3 shots instead of d6 meant that it had to go down in AP as far as GW is concerned. Putting the missiles down to AP -2 though made NO sense. These are NOT krak missiles, Vahl's missile launcher is sure, but Exorcist missiles are literally "melta" level missiles that are made to crack armor. The Conflagration rockets are the anti-infantry option.
As far as a reprinted codex like I discussed, or whatever they end up doing, I really just feel like there are a few small things in our book that just do not feel like they should. Tale of the Stoic and the Exorcist are the two most glaring for me, but even Aestred Thurga, and one or two other things in the book probably need a second look. I am by no means saying we are weak, in fact according to Art of War we may very well be the top faction right now in the competitive scene, being the ONLY S tier army (which of course means we will be getting hit in a few months). However, for an edition that supposedly prides itself on :making things feel like they should on the tabletop" I would say there are definitely some questionable decisions GW made in our book. SM 2.0 should fix most of that problem with Marines, but if we get one that does the same thing, I will probably spend that money on a new book barely two years after the last one. Then again, I buy almost everything related to Sisters lol.
there are definitely small things id love to see changed. the exorcist missiles as noted in the previous posts. the nundums (and really all sisters vehicles) should get the artisan storm bolters. and nundum grenade launchers should just be cyclone missile launcher like vahl (or just a pair of krak missile launchers) it would at least make them useful and differentiate the carapace weapons better. the bolt pistol relic should be able to be taken on a seraphim superior (though personally id love to see relics/stratagems deleted from the game).
i feel like they are turning sisters into the Bretonnia of 40k. hell we even have the Grail Reliquae, the only thing we are missing is nuns on bikes for cavalry. if GW wants to stick with the awful priest system of 3+ to see if your unit you payed for does the thing you payed for, might as well just give us aspiring saints to channel the emperors light instead (and generic saint hq choice pls), hell the novitiates are basically knight errants.
I think at this point I would be better off reverse engineering my sisters into the horus herasy system which after reading the core book im liking alot better than 40k. reactions > stratagems by a large margin.
the only thing iv really liked out of modern sisters compared to the old witch hunter days is melee sisters which i always loved became a viable thing, zepharim iv wanted for a really long time.
If anything it should go back to ap-4, it was ap1 in the old armor system for a looooong time
I agree completely with going back to AP -4 like it was at the start of 8th in the original Index and even in that atrocious beta codex (since AP -4 as you stated, correlates to AP 1 or at least it seems to be that way). However, I highly doubt we are ever seeing that again because getting 3d3 shots instead of d6 meant that it had to go down in AP as far as GW is concerned. Putting the missiles down to AP -2 though made NO sense. These are NOT krak missiles, Vahl's missile launcher is sure, but Exorcist missiles are literally "melta" level missiles that are made to crack armor. The Conflagration rockets are the anti-infantry option.
As far as a reprinted codex like I discussed, or whatever they end up doing, I really just feel like there are a few small things in our book that just do not feel like they should. Tale of the Stoic and the Exorcist are the two most glaring for me, but even Aestred Thurga, and one or two other things in the book probably need a second look. I am by no means saying we are weak, in fact according to Art of War we may very well be the top faction right now in the competitive scene, being the ONLY S tier army (which of course means we will be getting hit in a few months). However, for an edition that supposedly prides itself on :making things feel like they should on the tabletop" I would say there are definitely some questionable decisions GW made in our book. SM 2.0 should fix most of that problem with Marines, but if we get one that does the same thing, I will probably spend that money on a new book barely two years after the last one. Then again, I buy almost everything related to Sisters lol.
there are definitely small things id love to see changed. the exorcist missiles as noted in the previous posts. the nundums (and really all sisters vehicles) should get the artisan storm bolters. and nundum grenade launchers should just be cyclone missile launcher like vahl (or just a pair of krak missile launchers) it would at least make them useful and differentiate the carapace weapons better. the bolt pistol relic should be able to be taken on a seraphim superior (though personally id love to see relics/stratagems deleted from the game).
i feel like they are turning sisters into the Bretonnia of 40k. hell we even have the Grail Reliquae, the only thing we are missing is nuns on bikes for cavalry. if GW wants to stick with the awful priest system of 3+ to see if your unit you payed for does the thing you payed for, might as well just give us aspiring saints to channel the emperors light instead (and generic saint hq choice pls), hell the novitiates are basically knight errants.
I think at this point I would be better off reverse engineering my sisters into the horus herasy system which after reading the core book im liking alot better than 40k. reactions > stratagems by a large margin.
the only thing iv really liked out of modern sisters compared to the old witch hunter days is melee sisters which i always loved became a viable thing, zepharim iv wanted for a really long time.
Convert them to Sigmar. The reactions system from HH is just a cheap knock-off of Sigmar's version of command points anyway.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
U02dah4 wrote: Out of interest what relics and wl traits are people still taking?
Burning Ire (for WOE and Rapturous only) and/or Chaplet of Sacrifice. That's pretty much it. If I'm not taking WOE or Rapturous, I take Righteous Rage on Morvenn.
So this is just me theory crafting/asking for advice a bit since I happen to be playing a guy who's newer to the game who also brings Sisters to most of his matchups (mostly OoML). We have played about 4 games of Sisters v Sisters so far with me winning 2, losing 1 and drawing 1 (though this was only because I thought Sacred Grounds could not be scored in the final turn and after talking it out and checking I realized I could and so would have easily won when that was completed at the end of the game since I was going 2nd). I have brought some EC and then some Bloody Rose to show him some different builds he can go for if he does not want to keep playing OoML but I think he is set on them right now. What I have noticed from all of these games is that our mirror matchup is actually more difficult than I realized, or maybe I am just not used to playing other Sisters in 9th since I have routinely been the only guy who plays them as my main army until now.
Does anyone have any advice for the mirror match in Nephilim? To be specific, over our last few games I have been pretty much handicapping myself in some way since he is a newer player. Often I deploy a little poorly in some way and then just give him first turn to see what he does (even though we have rolled just to see what would happen and I have gotten first turn in every game we have played pretty much), or I walk him through a pretty crucial turn, helping him understand what he should accomplish, and I also have given him some game deciding moves, such as in our last game when we tied he was between two possible moves on the board with Celestine and I suggested the one that ended up pretty much tying the game (though as I said there were some things with Sacred Grounds and a few other avenues to victory that we didn't actually play out but we talked through and it turned out that I would have probably won by doing any of them). We have pretty much been playing in the 1500-1850 points bracket since he is still building his collection, but despite knowing the army pretty well I would say I find myself struggling a bit more than I probably should. As another fact, I honestly barely play Bloody Rose armies, I have just never enjoyed playing that Order despite how good it is and I am only playing it against him as a way to learn it a bit better for a possible local tourney I might enter soon. Him playing OoML helps that since he is able to score so quickly on Leap usually that I am always playing catchup with all of my handicaps. This helps me learn that army better, and I don't feel as bad playing BR against him since OoML plays the secondary game so well.
Anyway, does anyone have any advice on how to deal with us in the mirror match? I have been playing a version of the list that won the Bay Area event a month or so ago, though of course without all the toys since we are playing at lower points. For the most part we have very similar builds I just bring more Repentia and Zephyrim while he ends up needing to use min squads of Arcos and the Penitent Engine just because they came in the combat patrol box. Sorry this got so long winded, I am just honestly amazed at how tough we are to beat even with ourselves, and I was wondering if anyone has any advice on how to better prepare for Sisters vs Sisters. I feel woefully overwhelmed when facing us for some reason, but maybe it's just because of all the handicaps I am giving myself, expecting my vaster experience from playing the game about a decade and a half longer than him to make up the difference. Any advice would be appreciated. I do plan on bringing the WoE Canoness (as I have done in other builds in the past) when we eventually start playing proper 2000 point games but as for right now I just do not have the room for it at our current points. Finally, I find my Repentia trading a bit more poorly than usual lately, and maybe it's just due to the fact I am not soaking overwatch with something first, but he has gotten so lucky on his overwatch lately it's wiping half of my squad before they get in. Again, probably a result of me always giving him first turn in our last 2 or 3 games where he can set up for their eventual charge and wipe out my Rhino and any other chargers before they are able to get into position despite me usually deploying at least THOSE units well enough.
I will tell you now that we have gotten several games in I will stop handicapping myself as much and probably start playing a bit more competitively than usual, since I think he may be getting a little too comfortable.
1) A good list is built with a stratagy - a well built OOML list is built for board control as such it will spam units like novitiates and sacresants. A good BR on the other hand is going to have a stronger focus on things like zephyrim that stab the enemy. If your opponent is largely bringing a combat patrol box then they deserve to lose because its not a thought out considered army its a collection of what they have and so they fail at list building. Conversely you are building a list derived from a tourney list something a professional players has thought over.
2) even if they build a list competently those lists don't match up evenly one list is getting protection from rerolls which doesn't help much if your not running vahl due to low points and protection from MW spam which you are not using. The other is gaining bonus to A and bonus to AP both of which help. BR will therefore have the advantage. The compromise is to try minoris and take +1 to hit in the first round of combat and can only be wounded on 1.2 which will provide protection vs a number of choices you may make. You should be winning 95% of mirrors based on the above to facts alone
3) overwatch shouldnt be that deadly 20 Bolt gun shots is 3 hits 2 wounds 1.33 dead and they are burning large quantities of CP for the privaledge
4) Finally as in any game play the mission you should be getting 12 on Leap every mission you should be getting 12-15 on shrine most missions. The most common reason newer players lose missions especilly with a BR type list is they focus on killing the enemy and forget the game is really about the objectives.
1) A good list is built with a stratagy - a well built OOML list is built for board control as such it will spam units like novitiates and sacresants. A good BR on the other hand is going to have a stronger focus on things like zephyrim that stab the enemy. If your opponent is largely bringing a combat patrol box then they deserve to lose because its not a thought out considered army its a collection of what they have and so they fail at list building. Conversely you are building a list derived from a tourney list something a professional players has thought over.
2) even if they build a list competently those lists don't match up evenly one list is getting protection from rerolls which doesn't help much if your not running vahl due to low points and protection from MW spam which you are not using. The other is gaining bonus to A and bonus to AP both of which help. BR will therefore have the advantage. The compromise is to try minoris and take +1 to hit in the first round of combat and can only be wounded on 1.2 which will provide protection vs a number of choices you may make. You should be winning 95% of mirrors based on the above to facts alone
3) overwatch shouldnt be that deadly 20 Bolt gun shots is 3 hits 2 wounds 1.33 dead and they are burning large quantities of CP for the privaledge
4) Finally as in any game play the mission you should be getting 12 on Leap every mission you should be getting 12-15 on shrine most missions. The most common reason newer players lose missions especilly with a BR type list is they focus on killing the enemy and forget the game is really about the objectives.
Thank you for all of these points. I always aim to play the mission of course, and usually score pretty well on primary and decently on secondary, but I will say I have not been getting Leap to more than 10 usually because I try to save MD for key moments earlier in the game and then end up trying to catch up on it toward the end when I have killed most of my opponent's army by Turn 3 or 4. I completely agree with that assessment on BR players, as with only playing BR 3 times now I am still very focused on trying to kill/deny points instead of scoring my own, with the hope of scoring big in the later turns. That is a mindset I need to shift a bit definitely. This newer player definitely understands how to play OOML now despite not using Novitiates or Sacresants. He board controls in different ways with masses of deep strike and strategic reserves spearheaded by Celestine and then Vahl on the board as usual. I usually counter that with some good screening and then a deep strike of Zephyrim and Seraphim of my own, especially using this derivative of a tourney list. As I said our lists are usually very similar with Celestine and Vahl on both sides, a unit of Warsuits, the barebones BS squads, 2 squads of MM Rets, Dominions with SBs and then he uses more Seraphim while I use more Zephyrim as I said and then I usually bring more Repentia. Then things like Mortifiers on my side and a Pengine on his, a Rhino each, etc. As far as list construction goes he is definitely playing the less optimal one but he understands well how to score big in the early game to make it difficult for an opponent that can almost table him to catch up, which is something I have impressed upon him since we started. He had already come into the game with that mindset but I think I have helped him refine it over these last few games.
As for the Overwatch, it has honestly never been a problem this edition prior to my games against Sisters. Either I charge with a Rhino or something to soak it or do so with some other character that usually survives regardless of making the charge or not. However, I have been sending my Repentia into his warsuits lately (after wiping out 1 or 2 in shooting of course) and he usually has a 6 to make sure a melta goes through which is fine, I expect that, but then will score 4-8 6s to hit with Vahl's rerolls on them out of the 8-16 storm bolter shots. Then I usually just fail every FNP on the girls and all of a sudden I have 3-5 Repentia left lol. I plan on bringing a smaller missile of them soon, probably 5 or so like Jesse with his Bay Area list, I just have been trying to pull my punches up until now. As for why I am not using something to soak in these games, either my Rhino has been out of position or just dead on Turn 1 or 2, which I expect of course.
As I have said throughout all of this, I think the major factors as to why I am struggling a bit with this specific set of mirror matches are that I am relatively inexperienced with BR (though this is definitely the lesser of the factors) and that I have been purposely handicapping myself in some way, shape, or form to help teach him as much as possible. Going forward, especially as we play 2000 point games, I plan on playing normally without any handicaps. That alone should give me a better chance against ourselves, and also let me figure out BR more as I continue to get in game after game with them. He already agreed to be a bit of a sparring partner for me, allowing me to test the strongest list ideas I have (usually tournament winning derivative lists) on him since most of the rest of the crew at the FLGS would just consider me "that guy" if I brought BR every game.
What secondary's are people taking? I like Leap of faith and defend the shrine which both score well but I'm having trouble figuring out a good 3rd choice.
RND seems decent but rarely scores higher than 8.
And then there is the kill secondary's if your opponent gives one up.
But what is the general consensus for the 3rd option?
Gg doubles this takes me back to my argument with erjac reguarding beacon of faith being essential the extra disposable miracle dice is often the difference between a 10 and 12.
Leap is an auto 12
Shrine is an auto choice in every mission except Abandoned Sanctuaries and even then its still a solid choice pick the middle and hold it for the win
Sacred grounds is an auto take in any mission with two objectives just outside your deployment zone the only mission I don't want to take it on is abandoned Sanctuaries because of the limited number objectives and all being in the middle too far from your deployment zone so I take RND. If there is an obvious kill mission this is the one I drop but it has to be solid
While banners is fine also I struggle to argue for it when Sacred is an easy 11 and 15 when you dominate and banners is good often in the same missions Sacred is good
U02dah4 wrote: Gg doubles this takes me back to my argument with erjac reguarding beacon of faith being essential the extra disposable miracle dice is often the difference between a 10 and 12.
Leap is an auto 12
Shrine is an auto choice in every mission except Abandoned Sanctuaries and even then its still a solid choice pick the middle and hold it for the win
Sacred grounds is an auto take in any mission with two objectives just outside your deployment zone the only mission I don't want to take it on is abandoned Sanctuaries because of the limited number objectives and all being in the middle too far from your deployment zone so I take RND. If there is an obvious kill mission this is the one I drop but it has to be solid
While banners is fine also I struggle to argue for it when Sacred is an easy 11 and 15 when you dominate and banners is good often in the same missions Sacred is good
Yea regarding the Beacon of Faith WT I did find yesterday that had I had one more MD in that final turn I would have been able to at least get 11 on Leap, definitely winning me the game. Though I also found that there was another scoring issue in that particular game so it turns out I had it on points regardless, just a messy game in general but it's to be expected with one of the players being newer.
Shrine I am finding is good but my shrine is often focused by my opponent the entire game, while I do the same to them in the mirror match so I have routinely been getting 6-9 at best at least against Sisters lol. Funnily enough the missions I played in that mirror match yesterday was Abandoned Sanctuaries and we both took Sacred Grounds. We both scored 6 on it, I can see it being bad in that mission but even on the other 5 objective missions it's usually an easy 6-11 points, but again a big part of that was in that final turn I should have had Celestine just do it and I would have scored 11 on it, again winning me that mission. Of course for normal games Shrine and Sacred Grounds are incredibly good for us!
The bottom line is that last game was good fun but definitely messy at best. We both did not realize that the 2nd primary mission only scores 2 regardless of how many conditions you satisfy so my opponent was scoring 4 points on certain turns. I was only ever scoring 2 anyway so it worked out on my end, and then at the end of the game I held the center so should have been scoring the full 7 I believe, again just winning it for the BR list. I know no 40k game will ever truly be perfect, but that last game had so many issues on scoring that I am glad we ended up calling it a draw lol. I guess with how many issues occurred in that Bay Area Open in that final game though I really can't complain, it even happens at the highest levels. I just hate when I mess things up so uch like that, I consider myself a better player than that usually.
OK, hope this doesn't end up being too long a post. As it stands, I'm really struggling to decide what to do with my sisters with the units I have. My original desire was to run Sacred Rose, and while I'm not opposed to doing that still, I just see them taking hit after hit without much bonus. AOC seems to hit their damage output as I was running lots of bodies therefore wanted to make the most out of bolter fire as possible (Divine Guidance SR, and Catechism of Repugnance, plus occasional Emperor's judgement for exploding 6s). These seem so lacklustre now since anything Ap-1 will just get ignored vs many armies, and limited CP does not make Emp judge worth it.
Now I could still stick with SR and maybe lean heavy into MW and MD, using Stern, Light of Agnathea relic, refrain of Blazing Piety hymn, and blessed Bolts, but the construction of the list is still challenging.
I have started looking more at VH for resilience, especially since I have quite a few vehicles which benefit from the loss of RR to wounds, whereas they don't really benefit from anything SR. Slapping the Sacred Right "Light of the Emp" on VH makes them pretty resilient and less likely to lose much to morale (so Sacred Rose light basically).
BR of course is also a favourite, but my army does not lean into the units that really make it shine (no zeph, just 12 repentia, 5 sacresants, etc).
OOML and AS have zero interest for me, and not sure on EC either. I'd prefer to stick with SR or maybe switch to VH based upon my current model collection. Not opposed to buying more but would like to use what I have too. really just looking how to configure my block of sisters into their relevant slots (battle sisters, dominions, retributors, etc)
Currently looking at
pretty much all HQ options except Triumph which I planned to get when i finish painting as a centerpiece. Cannonesses armed with either Blessed blade/pp/rod, Brazier and chainsword, or relic chainsword and pistol.
Hospitaller and Dialogus (no Dogmata, but easy to convert)
About 50-60 sisters with mixed weaponry. Includes 4 ASB, 4 MM, 4 HB, 4 HF, 2 flamer, 2 melta, 5 simulacrum, etc. Really DO NOT want to have an army that runs 3x5 bare bones battle sisters. Obviously the above can be broken into dominions and Retributors as well as sister squads.
2x5 seraphim (2 dual HF, 2 dual inferno although my group kosher with counting these as HF too)
5 sacrecants (halberd and spear)
3 patragon suits (MM/mace on sup, 2x HF/sword on others)
12 repentia plus superior
Exorcist
2 immolators
Rhino (not opposed to another)
No castigator currently.
ideally looking for a list that has a decent number of sister bodies, and uses all 4 of the vehicles I own. One possibility would be, for example,...
Exorcist
2x6 rets (2MM, 1 HF, simulacrum) in Immolators
10 dominions w 4 ASB in rhino (or 10 repentia)
3x10 sisters on foot (not sure on loadouts)
I can certainly run a 20 girl squad with the 4 ASB too.
Anyway, that's where I'm at currently, and just wondering which Order to lean into with my current collection. It's doing my head in, lol.
Order wise I would say there are two good choices competitively
1) BR
2) Minoris - VH struggles in that it buffs defensively in some match ups but its very much based on your opponent's list if they arnt spamming rerolls or MW it does little. So can't be wounded on 1,2 is often the better defense buff
However your list doesn't have the models to play the defensive game so BR is probably your best bet
bullyboy wrote: OK, hope this doesn't end up being too long a post. As it stands, I'm really struggling to decide what to do with my sisters with the units I have. My original desire was to run Sacred Rose, and while I'm not opposed to doing that still, I just see them taking hit after hit without much bonus. AOC seems to hit their damage output as I was running lots of bodies therefore wanted to make the most out of bolter fire as possible (Divine Guidance SR, and Catechism of Repugnance, plus occasional Emperor's judgement for exploding 6s). These seem so lacklustre now since anything Ap-1 will just get ignored vs many armies, and limited CP does not make Emp judge worth it.
Now I could still stick with SR and maybe lean heavy into MW and MD, using Stern, Light of Agnathea relic, refrain of Blazing Piety hymn, and blessed Bolts, but the construction of the list is still challenging.
I have started looking more at VH for resilience, especially since I have quite a few vehicles which benefit from the loss of RR to wounds, whereas they don't really benefit from anything SR. Slapping the Sacred Right "Light of the Emp" on VH makes them pretty resilient and less likely to lose much to morale (so Sacred Rose light basically).
BR of course is also a favourite, but my army does not lean into the units that really make it shine (no zeph, just 12 repentia, 5 sacresants, etc).
OOML and AS have zero interest for me, and not sure on EC either. I'd prefer to stick with SR or maybe switch to VH based upon my current model collection. Not opposed to buying more but would like to use what I have too. really just looking how to configure my block of sisters into their relevant slots (battle sisters, dominions, retributors, etc)
Currently looking at
pretty much all HQ options except Triumph which I planned to get when i finish painting as a centerpiece. Cannonesses armed with either Blessed blade/pp/rod, Brazier and chainsword, or relic chainsword and pistol.
Hospitaller and Dialogus (no Dogmata, but easy to convert)
About 50-60 sisters with mixed weaponry. Includes 4 ASB, 4 MM, 4 HB, 4 HF, 2 flamer, 2 melta, 5 simulacrum, etc. Really DO NOT want to have an army that runs 3x5 bare bones battle sisters. Obviously the above can be broken into dominions and Retributors as well as sister squads.
2x5 seraphim (2 dual HF, 2 dual inferno although my group kosher with counting these as HF too)
5 sacrecants (halberd and spear)
3 patragon suits (MM/mace on sup, 2x HF/sword on others)
12 repentia plus superior
Exorcist
2 immolators
Rhino (not opposed to another)
No castigator currently.
ideally looking for a list that has a decent number of sister bodies, and uses all 4 of the vehicles I own. One possibility would be, for example,...
Exorcist
2x6 rets (2MM, 1 HF, simulacrum) in Immolators
10 dominions w 4 ASB in rhino (or 10 repentia)
3x10 sisters on foot (not sure on loadouts)
I can certainly run a 20 girl squad with the 4 ASB too.
Anyway, that's where I'm at currently, and just wondering which Order to lean into with my current collection. It's doing my head in, lol.
Not exactly sure how competitive you want to be but I would honestly say that running a Minoris Order of some kind would be good for you if you want something like SR or VH but think that actually playing with either of those Convictions or Stratagems won't help you much in your games. I agree that right now most AP -1 is just not worth it because of the many AoC armies like loyalist or chaos marines that always run rampant. I personally have been running my Minoris Order with "Guided By the Emperor's Will" and "Righteous Suffering" (which I know the post above specifically recommends). I mostly use this setup for Crusade games but have found some limited success with it in standard Eternal War missions and even Tempest of War games as well, so playing Minoris Orders can be fun as well as effective!
If you want to go BR there is nothing wrong with that of course, but I also want to make sure you are having fun with your collection! I personally really do not enjoy playing BR and have only played it over my past few games because I am debating entering a tourney soon and know that if I want to do well I really should at least think about running my collection as that Order. Maybe try a few of the Minoris Order traits and find two that really make you feel like you are still playing SR but more effective or something like that. I also have had some real success with the 20 girl blob of Sisters with the 4 ASB, Hospitaller, Dogmata, the "Defenders of the Faith" Strat and of course Vahl. Obviously this is not the most optimal choice but it can put some real pain out as long as you keep it pretty intact over the first turn or two!
Hope you find a way to play with your collection soon, I would suggest just trying everything you have discussed a bit and then see what you enjoy the most!
Not exactly sure how competitive you want to be but I would honestly say that running a Minoris Order of some kind would be good for you if you want something like SR or VH but think that actually playing with either of those Convictions or Stratagems won't help you much in your games. I agree that right now most AP -1 is just not worth it because of the many AoC armies like loyalist or chaos marines that always run rampant. I personally have been running my Minoris Order with "Guided By the Emperor's Will" and "Righteous Suffering" (which I know the post above specifically recommends). I mostly use this setup for Crusade games but have found some limited success with it in standard Eternal War missions and even Tempest of War games as well, so playing Minoris Orders can be fun as well as effective!
If you want to go BR there is nothing wrong with that of course, but I also want to make sure you are having fun with your collection! I personally really do not enjoy playing BR and have only played it over my past few games because I am debating entering a tourney soon and know that if I want to do well I really should at least think about running my collection as that Order. Maybe try a few of the Minoris Order traits and find two that really make you feel like you are still playing SR but more effective or something like that. I also have had some real success with the 20 girl blob of Sisters with the 4 ASB, Hospitaller, Dogmata, the "Defenders of the Faith" Strat and of course Vahl. Obviously this is not the most optimal choice but it can put some real pain out as long as you keep it pretty intact over the first turn or two!
Hope you find a way to play with your collection soon, I would suggest just trying everything you have discussed a bit and then see what you enjoy the most!
Yeah, I don't expect to play my sisters competitively but they certainly will be used in matched play scenarios, along with narrative etc. My original plan when I started building the list was to play a "war of the roses" list with the bulk of the sisters in a Sacred Rose battalion plus a detachment of Bloody Rose which would emphasize the close combat elements of the list. Obviously that has changed a lot with the change in rules regarding singular order choices. I can certainly play some BR in the future (if I add some more sacresants and perhaps some zeph) but probably not going to lean into them just now. It seems outside of BR, the Order choice doesn't seem to matter that much and how you manage your MD, CP, and character blessings makes more of a difference. I may try some of the Minoris rules out too since there are very few WTs, relics that are Order locked that seem to be outstanding.
Appreciate the feedback.
2) even if they build a list competently those lists don't match up evenly one list is getting protection from rerolls which doesn't help much if your not running vahl due to low points and protection from MW spam which you are not using. The other is gaining bonus to A and bonus to AP both of which help. BR will therefore have the advantage. The compromise is to try minoris and take +1 to hit in the first round of combat and can only be wounded on 1.2 which will provide protection vs a number of choices you may make. You should be winning 95% of mirrors based on the above to facts alone.
I know the conversation moved on a bit from this, but I think you confused Valorous Heart for Order of our Martyred Lady in this point. VH disables wound rerolls and providers a 5+ wound shrug on mortal wounds. I believe the poster's friend was playing Martyred Lady, who instead gain a miracle dice at the end of any phase in which one of their units were destroyed, and +1 to hit for any unit below starting strength.
What you said about VH is insightful and accurate though.
2) even if they build a list competently those lists don't match up evenly one list is getting protection from rerolls which doesn't help much if your not running vahl due to low points and protection from MW spam which you are not using. The other is gaining bonus to A and bonus to AP both of which help. BR will therefore have the advantage. The compromise is to try minoris and take +1 to hit in the first round of combat and can only be wounded on 1.2 which will provide protection vs a number of choices you may make. You should be winning 95% of mirrors based on the above to facts alone.
I know the conversation moved on a bit from this, but I think you confused Valorous Heart for Order of our Martyred Lady in this point. VH disables wound rerolls and providers a 5+ wound shrug on mortal wounds. I believe the poster's friend was playing Martyred Lady, who instead gain a miracle dice at the end of any phase in which one of their units were destroyed, and +1 to hit for any unit below starting strength.
What you said about VH is insightful and accurate though.
Yea I noticed this during the conversation too, but I understood the point. The bottom line is there is a reason that Bloody Rose is head and shoulders above the other Major Orders right now and my opponent is playing their OoML list excellently regarding our secondaries despite playing a less optimal Order and being relatively new to the faction (that and, as I said, I have been telling him tactically what moves to make usually in order to have the best chance of winning or drawing the game). My inexperience with Bloody Rose has been showing in these last few games too and I am too focused on wiping units while denying my opponent points instead of just scoring more of my own secondary objectives (Leap, Shrine, and Sacred Grounds usually). I will be playing my buddy again soon and I have already told him I am going all out this time, playing my best and not helping him nearly as much as I have been over the last few games. That combined with at least three games of BR lists under my belt should help me best whatever list he comes up with now. I am determined to at least get better at playing BR in case I do enter some local tournaments soon.
2) even if they build a list competently those lists don't match up evenly one list is getting protection from rerolls which doesn't help much if your not running vahl due to low points and protection from MW spam which you are not using. The other is gaining bonus to A and bonus to AP both of which help. BR will therefore have the advantage. The compromise is to try minoris and take +1 to hit in the first round of combat and can only be wounded on 1.2 which will provide protection vs a number of choices you may make. You should be winning 95% of mirrors based on the above to facts alone.
I know the conversation moved on a bit from this, but I think you confused Valorous Heart for Order of our Martyred Lady in this point. VH disables wound rerolls and providers a 5+ wound shrug on mortal wounds. I believe the poster's friend was playing Martyred Lady, who instead gain a miracle dice at the end of any phase in which one of their units were destroyed, and +1 to hit for any unit below starting strength.
What you said about VH is insightful and accurate though.
Yea I noticed this during the conversation too, but I understood the point. The bottom line is there is a reason that Bloody Rose is head and shoulders above the other Major Orders right now and my opponent is playing their OoML list excellently regarding our secondaries despite playing a less optimal Order and being relatively new to the faction (that and, as I said, I have been telling him tactically what moves to make usually in order to have the best chance of winning or drawing the game). My inexperience with Bloody Rose has been showing in these last few games too and I am too focused on wiping units while denying my opponent points instead of just scoring more of my own secondary objectives (Leap, Shrine, and Sacred Grounds usually). I will be playing my buddy again soon and I have already told him I am going all out this time, playing my best and not helping him nearly as much as I have been over the last few games. That combined with at least three games of BR lists under my belt should help me best whatever list he comes up with now. I am determined to at least get better at playing BR in case I do enter some local tournaments soon.
Thanks for pointing this out though!
While BR definitely has the advantage, output is pretty much irrelevant in mirror matches. Whether your Repentia are doing 2 attacks at AP-3 or 3 attacks at AP-4, either way there are only 3 units in the army that MIGHT survive them(Morvenn, Celestine, Paragons). Also, unless you brought paragons or a castigator, your shooting is mostly irrelevant in the mirror as well.
A BR list and an OoML list played against each other, both piloted perfectly, should go to the BR player 8 out of 10. HOWEVER, any mistake you make will be punished extremely harshly just by the sheer nature of the matchup. Screw up one movement phase and fail to pickup one turn of shrine or leave a juicy target for a long MD charge and you'll dig yourself a very deep hole only your opponent screwing up will be able to dig you out of.
I agree completely that any minor mistake in the mirror will be punished quickly and brutally. If I look at the 4 games we have played the mirror match so far, I won the first based on sheer experience as it was only his second or third time playing the army and actual missions aside from just practice games learning the basics. The second game he deployed without realizing I could move the Rhino with Repentia for 2CP at the start of the game and I made him pay immediately, he pretty much called it by the end of Turn 2 after I wiped out about 60% of his models and had a massive points lead. The third game (which happened right after the 2nd as I let him redeploy) pretty much went to him as soon as I failed a very early 7" Repentia charge with a reroll (only had low MD so nothing I could do to help that unfortunately). I stayed in the game as much as I could but the final score was around 100-60 in OoML's favor. Granted I was not playing that tourney list in this game, and purposely tried some different things that I was pretty sure would not work but wanted to see how much they would not for myself. The final game was that "draw" we played last week, but again, on further review it turns out that I narrowly won in that final turn about 64-62 or around that point total give or take some miscalculated points throughout the game, as I said it was messy to say the least.
So if you simply look at those 4 games my BR has a record of around 3 out of 4 or 75% of the games. This is an incredibly small sample size and means almost nothing but there is no doubt that the BR lists are winning a majority of the time against OoML even if you take that draw as kosher and give my BR lists a record of 2-1-1 instead.
Something else that is just such an outlier are that in some of these games wild things are happening like a Mortifier with Flails putting out about 30 attacks over several turns against about 3 Battle Sisters on an objective and it took three rounds of combat to wipe them. Honestly I would say I rolled below average on most of the hits or wounds with it but still, my opponent rolled 4+'s like crazy. I know he doesn't have any weighted dice but there have just been some crazy rolls in many of these games that feel like they tip the balance at various points and lead to such a struggle. I know dice rarely should be making the difference in most of these games, but at least two of them feel like failed charges, below average hits and wounds, and in particular my top bracket Castigator firing 15 shots at a single battle sister not in cover and failing to kill her, really played a huge role in deciding the outcome in those final turns.
Again, these couple of games are almost meaningless of course and I cannot go by any of these results as anything definitive. I just didn't fully realize how much of a struggle it actually is to play us until I started to lol. Glad we are so good at least!
People always underestimate variance - in dice roles - I had a novitiate squad tank the shooting of 6 aggressors losing only one girl - improbable things happens but in general it evens out
Charges are good examples of when a fail vs a success makes a huge difference to outcome but the good player will consistently have their models position correctly and so minimise charge successes
U02dah4 wrote: People always underestimate variance - in dice roles - I had a novitiate squad tank the shooting of 6 aggressors losing only one girl - improbable things happens but in general it evens out
Charges are good examples of when a fail vs a success makes a huge difference to outcome but the good player will consistently have their models position correctly and so minimise charge distances
My variances lately was two seperate situations where Vahl need to pass 3 out of 6 saves to live, including a Miracle dice guarantee save AND enough CP and miracle dice to do Moment of Grace from 2+. She died both times.
Are people finding hymns to be necessary in lists nowadays? I just find most of them pretty underwhelming, especially given they need a roll of 3+ if you don't want to burn a CP. Seems the only good ones are the pseudo smite (clutch against Ctan/Ghaz/Phoenix lords), the psychic protection (situational), and perhaps the bolter buff. I dunno, I'm just not entirely convinced.
EDIT: +1 Attack is probably the most consistently useful of the hyms.
U02dah4 wrote: People always underestimate variance - in dice roles - I had a novitiate squad tank the shooting of 6 aggressors losing only one girl - improbable things happens but in general it evens out
Charges are good examples of when a fail vs a success makes a huge difference to outcome but the good player will consistently have their models position correctly and so minimise charge distances
No doubt that the good/more experienced player should always put themselves in positions where even large amounts of variance in dice rolls do not completely swing in a game, even on a failed charge of 7" or less or dozens of shots/attacks not removing a key model or two. Even things like what ERJAK had happen to his Vahl on those separate occasions should hopefully not be costing you a game even though it just sucks to have those things happen, like Celestine failing her roll to come back (which actually happened to both my Sisters opponent and I in one of our games lol). What I am finding regarding variance determining outcomes in certain games is when everything just goes wrong at once. Several failed charges of 5-7", 15-30 shots/attacks failing to wipe out one model that is not even in cover, my opponent's Vahl tanking 8-12 melta shots to the face and not a single point of damage going through, etc. Variance definitely evens out throughout all games, but in my last few it has definitely felt like bad luck has just kept adding up for me. That "draw" in our last game almost entirely hinged on my opponent's Vahl tanking 8 melta shots without taking a single point of damage. I concede completely that I misplayed slightly in some positioning as well which didn't help me, but if even one melta shot goes through in that turn the game looks very different.
Of course my own good luck in dozens of games evens all of this out, but variance has not been my friend of late, at least in the mirror match lol.
Is Morvenn Vahl still a really important unit for us in general? I'm painting mine up and haven't proxied her before. I know she was massively hyped when she first arrived, but it seems like a lot of that has worn off. I get the sense nowadays she's mainly a buff unit, with her decent close combat ability being more of a counter punch/deterrent than a wrecking ball in itself. Perhaps that was always the case.
ArikTaranis wrote: Is Morvenn Vahl still a really important unit for us in general? I'm painting mine up and haven't proxied her before. I know she was massively hyped when she first arrived, but it seems like a lot of that has worn off. I get the sense nowadays she's mainly a buff unit, with her decent close combat ability being more of a counter punch/deterrent than a wrecking ball in itself. Perhaps that was always the case.
She's still pretty nasty, and mostly an auto-include in competitive play. Her buff is really powerful, and nothing wants to be in close combat with her, considering she can (once per game) fight twice. If I was playing Sisters this year, I'd still be windmill slamming her into every list I ran, no question. I'm focusing on Imperial Knights for this year though, but whenever I come back around to Sisters I expect to still be running her (unless she gets new rules next edition that make her total crap).
She's a good unit most players will include her I don't feel she is essential but she is certainly a solid choice especially in BR which is the majority of comp lists. I'm running her to BITEM next weekend ( although my list there is a tad experimental).
(I say non essential though because I wasn't running her my last 3 events and I was still able to get some solid mid to upper results through board control and Novitiate spam)
Hey there guys, I just had a few questions come up in some of my previous games, either from my opponents or from other opponents that some of my friends have played. I was hoping to get some clarification on here so I know how best to answer them! Thanks!
1. If multiple Repentia squads are destroyed by your opponent in a single phase (other than morale of course), do you still only get one Miracle Dice that phase? Additionally, if it is an Order of Our Martyred Lady Repentia Squad that is destroyed, do you get two Miracle Dice, or still just the one?
2. If Celestine is performing an action such Sacred Grounds and gets destroyed but then resurrects using Miraculous Intervention, then does she still complete that action as long as she is still in range of that objective and maintains control of it? I guess the question here is does her losing her final wound result in the action being failed at all? I don't believe so but I wanted to make certain I hadn't missed some kind of FAQ or other clarification.
These are just some interactions that have come up lately and I want to make sure that myself, my opponents, and my friends who also play Sisters are all getting them as right as possible! Thanks again!
1) repentia are seperate from other miracle dice rules and triggered for each unit
2) Sadly no when she dies it fails same as with the stratagem that resurrects a dead character the why I can't remember but I have had this ruled at tournaments and their was a clear explanation.
Not to rehash what the poster above said too much, but there's lots of interactions here, so I wanted to outline exactly what you need so you can reference it to anybody who asks.
1. Look to both the Sisters Repentia data sheet and the page on Acts of Faith, specifically the section on gaining Miracle Dice.
You gain 1 Miracle Dice at the end of a phase in which any of the following conditions were met - Vengeance, where you kill a unit, or Sacrifice, where a Character unit of yours is killed. Sacrifice doesn't apply to the Repentia unit, but could apply to something else that phase, so keep that in mind.
The Order of Our Martyred Lady conviction (Blood of the Martyrs) separately states that you gain a Miracle Dice at the end of any phase in which any units with that conviction were killed. This would apply to the Repentia. It would also apply if the condition for Sacrifice or Vengeance was also met that phase - it's in addition to, not instead of. Keep in mind though that you only ever get one per phase from Sacrifice or Vengeance, and one per phase from Blood of the Martyrs no matter how many times you could trigger the condition.
Finally, Sisters Repentia have a fully separate rule on their data sheet called Martyrdom where a Miracle Dice is gained if they are destroyed in any phase except the morale phase. This is also separate from gaining dice from Sacrifice/Vengeance and Blood of the Martyrs. So you would gain a Miracle Dice for each Repentia unit killed in any phase except the morale phase, and if you're Martyred Lady you would gain an extra at the end of that phase because you lost the unit. You could also gain an additional one at the end of that phase if you lost a Character unit as well.
2. If a unit is destroyed, it fails the action it was performing per the big rule book section on actions. Since Miraculous Intervention, per her datasheet, specifically calls out that it triggers when she is destroyed, then the action fails.
Thanks to you both for clarifying all of that! Definitely some weird interactions here and there between our codex and each of the different seasons so even some of the more mundane things are tough to keep straight! Even in my own games this will help me be more aware!
GFdoubles wrote: Thanks to you both for clarifying all of that! Definitely some weird interactions here and there between our codex and each of the different seasons so even some of the more mundane things are tough to keep straight! Even in my own games this will help me be more aware!
Ugh, don't even get me started on how much the seasonal adjustments have slowly killed the diversity in subfaction usage in the competitive scene.
Bloody Rose battalion
Morvenn
Celestine
WOE Canoness with Relic Sword and Blazing Ire
BSS BSS Novitiates with PS on Superior
Dogmata Chorus
9 Repentia
5 Repentia
5 repentia
10 Zephyrim+Banner
10 Zephyrim+Banner
10 Zephyrim
Large ret squad+Cherub and Simulacrum (8 i think? idk, shaved extra bodies for points)
Min Ret squad with Cherub.
Round 1 played Deathguard on Icons. Ended up being a scrum in the middle but I had better coverage shooting the midboard so I had priority. Once he committed I hit him with Celestine+Morvenn+2 units of Zephyrim in a deathball. He almost took it anyway because he had the Anti-Reroll Aura thing on his demon prince. Ended up being a low scoring knock down drag out affair but I won by about 10 points thanks to a single BSS superior who survived 2 full rounds of Non-LoS shooting from PBCs. Took all 3 Sisters secondaries. Maxed Defend the Shrine and Leap, only got 6 on sacred ground.
Some significant rules errors here. My opponent was under the impression that ALL SoB armies stopped you from rerolling wounds and I was short counting my Zephyrim's attacks all game. Probably wouldn't have mattered, but worth noting.
Round 2: Played into Chaos Knights. Shooty knight, Punchy Knight, 3 helverins, 2 melee armigers, 2 standard loadout armigers. Repentia + Canoness took out the 2 melee wardogs first turn. Zephyrim were really only there for holding objectives. Celestine and the HERO WOE canoness using MD, and Moment of Grace to survive a round of CQC against a shooty knight managed to kill it largely thanks to Outrage of the Matriarch. Didn't count the extra attack from Blazing ire all game. Ended up winning 68-97 thanks to really easy secondaries (he didn't contest the center for most of the game so an easy 11 on sacred)
Third game against Goff Orkz with Ghazkull. Easily the toughest game of the night. Got first turn on abandoned sanctuaries, declared the center objective my shrine. put one unit of Zephyrim on all 3 center objectives and did the action on 4 objectives first turn. He WAAGHED and bumrushed the center on right objectives (failed the charge on the left) killed my entire centerpoint unit of zephyrim with Stormboyz. Still got 11 VP.
My turn killed his center and left contesting units. His turn killed all my zephyrim and most of my repentia. My turn, killed Ghaz and most of his objective grabbers.
Ended up taking it 91-71.
Summary: 30 Zephyrim is too many. Almost every game I had one full unit die before it did anything and had 0 left at the end of all 3 games. 20 in a 10-5-5 cofiguration would be A LOT better.
5 girl units of repentia are amazingly valuable, especially with Leap. WOE canoness continues to be an absolute monster, as are Celestine and Morvenn. Retributors quietly huge difference makers, especially in CQC mirrors. Novitiates surprisingly killy and even less resilient than I thought.
All in all, nice 3-0 day that gives me 150pts to play with in my next list.
I ran a full squad of Bloody Rose sacresants recently. Although I liked the damage output, they were much less durable than I hoped. Maybe it was just an unfortunate match up vs chaos knights.
I was initially planning to run another full squad, but now I'm wondering if a squad of repentia or zephyrim would be a better bet, and I could split the sacresants into 2 5-strong units. Any thoughts?
Personally I think Zephyrim are better than Sacresants these days; they are faster and have more attacks, albeit at lower strength, and even though their invul save is worse (and even with AoC that could matter). Zephys also have access to the (admittedly expensive) stratagem Embodied Prophecy for +1 to wound.
Yeah I think the introduction of AoC really closed the gap in durability between sacresants and other sisters units like zephyrim. That 2+ save (without AoC) means a lot less now, not that I'm complaining. I was just surprised and a little disappointed by how quickly my sacresants were whittled down. I might need to be a bit cagier and hug cover next time.
ArikTaranis wrote: Yeah I think the introduction of AoC really closed the gap in durability between sacresants and other sisters units like zephyrim. That 2+ save (without AoC) means a lot less now, not that I'm complaining. I was just surprised and a little disappointed by how quickly my sacresants were whittled down. I might need to be a bit cagier and hug cover next time.
I feel like losing the AP reduction on Sacresants and missing out on AoC is like the number one reason Valorous Heart isn't seen more often these days. Cold take probably lol
I'm thinking about starting a Bloody Rose army, just wondering; how many characters are too many? I'm dead set on taking Vahl and Celestine. A Canonness seems auto include too. Hospitaler seems great with Retributors, Repentia Superior seems great with Repentia and Dogmata seems good in general. Is that too many?
For context; this is the list I'm currently working with (playing some TTS games):
1988 points, probably just taking a cherub on one of the retributor squads for the final 10 (thought about dropping 2 repentias for 2 cherubs per squad, but that seems not quite worth?)
No Force Org:
Hospitaler
Repentia Superior (WT: Beacon of Faith)
M0ff3l wrote: I'm thinking about starting a Bloody Rose army, just wondering; how many characters are too many? I'm dead set on taking Vahl and Celestine. A Canonness seems auto include too. Hospitaler seems great with Retributors, Repentia Superior seems great with Repentia and Dogmata seems good in general. Is that too many?
Not at all. Every single one of those are the linchpins of like nearly every successful tournament Sororitas list in Nephilim.
M0ff3l wrote: For context; this is the list I'm currently working with (playing some TTS games):
1988 points, probably just taking a cherub on one of the retributor squads for the final 10 (thought about dropping 2 repentias for 2 cherubs per squad, but that seems not quite worth?)
It isn't.
Your list is pretty much what we've seen referred to as 'bloody rose goodstuff'. It can be very effective on the table, with slight variations coming in through personal preference and local meta. Looks great to me.
Played a 1k point Incursion game against none other than the Leagues of Votann this afternoon. Depending on how you look at it, I either lost by 1 point or won by 9 as my army was painted and my opponent's wasn't . I was running Bloody Rose with Morvenn Vahl, a single BSS, some melee stuff, and some Retributors in a Patrol detachment. My opponent was running Ymyr with a High Kahl, an Einhar Champion, 3 Hearthkyn squads, and 2 3-model bike units. We were playing with the nerfs in place, and I gotta say those space dwarfs are the real deal. Hearthkyn are a lot tougher than they look. One of the only reasons I did so well is that my opponent even with some rerolls and stuff whiffed hard with his Champion into Morvenn Vahl, who mercilessly squished him. If Vahl had died right there, I would have been steamrollered, but because she lived, she took out a bunch of other models before the Kahl took her out of the game (really flubbed my saves hard on that one). This game was my first small game of 9th (I previously had only played 2k games), and it's a lot different at the lower points level. Personally I think Sisters have a pretty good game into Votann, but not being able to reroll any wounds against them hurts (you're only getting half of Morvenn's buffs).
The Cherub, for sure. It almost always gets to do something, unless the whole squad does nothing and then the hand flamer would be pointless as well.
For the hand flamer on the other hand, I doubt it will ever be really useful. The superior is typically the first to die (unless you run a squad of 6+, which you might run considering you mention holy trinity) and if you're within 12" of your target, odds are high that you delete the target anyway. And if not, I doubt the loadout of the superior would've made a difference. I assume you mean multi-melta retributors, for heavy flamers or heavy bolters the hand flamer would make even less sense to me.
So I plan on making a more general thread about this in the general discussion thread, but I thought I would bring it up here first. With all the Toughness 9 in the game, especially the new Rogal Dorn tank along with all the Guard superheavies, do we think melta weapons are going to eventually see some kind of buff? I know we personally have other answers for T9 (BR Repentia) along with some limited S9 weaponry to combat the toughness increase (Warsuits with Maces, Castigator Battle Cannon) but while the amount of T9 in the game is still relatively rare, it does feel kind of inaccurate to have melta weapons (you know those things designed to destroy armor?) wounding a fair number of vehicles on 5s.
Any thoughts? I only discuss it here first because Melta has always been the Sisters' "main" way of dealing with armor.
M0ff3l wrote: I'm thinking about starting a Bloody Rose army, just wondering; how many characters are too many? I'm dead set on taking Vahl and Celestine. A Canonness seems auto include too. Hospitaler seems great with Retributors, Repentia Superior seems great with Repentia and Dogmata seems good in general. Is that too many?
For context; this is the list I'm currently working with (playing some TTS games):
1988 points, probably just taking a cherub on one of the retributor squads for the final 10 (thought about dropping 2 repentias for 2 cherubs per squad, but that seems not quite worth?)
No Force Org:
Hospitaler
Repentia Superior (WT: Beacon of Faith)
GFdoubles wrote: So I plan on making a more general thread about this in the general discussion thread, but I thought I would bring it up here first. With all the Toughness 9 in the game, especially the new Rogal Dorn tank along with all the Guard superheavies, do we think melta weapons are going to eventually see some kind of buff? I know we personally have other answers for T9 (BR Repentia) along with some limited S9 weaponry to combat the toughness increase (Warsuits with Maces, Castigator Battle Cannon) but while the amount of T9 in the game is still relatively rare, it does feel kind of inaccurate to have melta weapons (you know those things designed to destroy armor?) wounding a fair number of vehicles on 5s.
Any thoughts? I only discuss it here first because Melta has always been the Sisters' "main" way of dealing with armor.
We are just going to become more dependent on the vahl rerolls and Massed repentia
They wont buff melta as they like to differentiate more from the Las cannon
If the T9 vehicle in question has any kind of anti-reroll thing (such as the LoV Hekaton, which is T9 in one of their subfactions) even Morvenn won't help us. Only thing for it then is to just fire more meltas so more chances to wound. Also, Miracle Dice can lock in a wound. And I don't have my book in front of me right now but I think you can boost a wound roll with Moment of Grace?
It's a bit of a pickle re: toughness 9. In terms of nurgle daemons, I think sisters will be alright with weight of firepower. T9 Landfortesses on the other hand, yeah I don't know. As always Bloody Rose stands out due to extra ap and attacks in CC, particularly with repentia, paragons, and possibly even sacresants and zephyrim. There may be matchups where we just have to play the mission.
EDIT: The blessed bolts strategem could be useful against very tough targets, though I'm not sure people are running lots of artificer stormbolters.
So - theoretically - if somebody had five models to build as Celestians in a Black Tide style army, what would they arm the unit with to make them as least bad as possible?
Two Storm Bolters and then just use them as bullet catchers for a Canoness?
Lord Damocles wrote: So - theoretically - if somebody had five models to build as Celestians in a Black Tide style army, what would they arm the unit with to make them as least bad as possible?
Two Storm Bolters and then just use them as bullet catchers for a Canoness?
Probably meltas; unlike standard Battle Sisters they can take 2 specials plus a combi on the superior in a 5-girl squad. Maximize the firepower and make them dangerous, but probably put them in a Rhino with some Dominions to protect them and get them as close as possible to their target.
I know this will be an unpopular opinion, but I want to make the case for The Triumph of St Katherine.
For context, I play bloody rose and use mass paragon warsuits with multi meltas and maces. For this, the +1 to hit in CC is straight fire, and the auto 6 on a miracle dice once per battle round is excellent for high damage on the multi meltas. In the first turn, if I'm using zephyrim or Celestine then I can use that 6 to auto advance 18" and get on an objective. The additional miracle dice generation is also really handy, as it means you're more likely to be able to transform those 2s and keep the higher ones. To boot, it's deceptively tough, though it doesn't offer much damage output.
The sacres rites/fearlessness relics aren't great, and the shooting attack is situational, but the other three abilities are really powerful for manipulating the game in my list. I know the footprint is large so that's a struggle, but I feel the triumph maybe still really useful in certain lists like mine.
ArikTaranis wrote: I know this will be an unpopular opinion, but I want to make the case for The Triumph of St Katherine.
For context, I play bloody rose and use mass paragon warsuits with multi meltas and maces. For this, the +1 to hit in CC is straight fire, and the auto 6 on a miracle dice once per battle round is excellent for high damage on the multi meltas. In the first turn, if I'm using zephyrim or Celestine then I can use that 6 to auto advance 18" and get on an objective. The additional miracle dice generation is also really handy, as it means you're more likely to be able to transform those 2s and keep the higher ones. To boot, it's deceptively tough, though it doesn't offer much damage output.
The sacres rites/fearlessness relics aren't great, and the shooting attack is situational, but the other three abilities are really powerful for manipulating the game in my list. I know the footprint is large so that's a struggle, but I feel the triumph maybe still really useful in certain lists like mine.
You're committing a huge amount of resources to a deathball. Which is fine, but makes you VERY vulnerable to certain bad matchups.
Lammia wrote: It's not anything new. There are a few people who have made Nundam lists take top place before.
Doesn't fix their glaring weaknesses.
Armor of Contempt really helped with their most significant weakness. Personally I still wouldn't spam them as hard as John Lennon did, but since he has won a lot more 40k tournaments than I have I tend to trust him to know what he's doing.
Personally I think they still need a points decrease, but at this point I don't think that's in the cards because lists with Paragons have done fairly well in the last few months.
The new Munitorum Field Manual will have a big say in that. This detachment can easily allow you to ditch your Troops, but if GW presents points that make Troops (especial Battle Sisters) more efficient, they just might stay in list.
Yes without a change I can't see much value in troops I mean seraphim are just 5pts more if I want a more flexible objective holder and I can add 2 Crusaders and 2 assassins as nofos
Automatically Appended Next Post: Thinking about it the extra elite slot for characters might mean the Preacher becomes a viable choice it was never worth the elite slot before but its very pts efficient
So based on supposedly "reliable" leaks it looks like several nerfs are incoming for us in the first two weeks of January. What we "know" are as follows:
-AoC is going away (looks like across the board, though there is a version that says TS and GKs keeps it, I doubt it though). If everyone is pretty much losing it I think it's fine. Valorous Heart should go back to its normal benefits then and we may see some more varied Orders in competitive lists again. It is definitely going to be a hit to us, but I think we will end up falling somewhere in low A or high B tier.
- "Minor Secondary Nerfs" are coming for us, which I completely expected. Hopefully it doesn't make anything unplayable though supposedly there will only be 3 faction secondaries now anyway. We just have to see what secondaries get eliminated for us. If they keep our three main ones (Leap, Shrine, and Sacred Grounds) I am expecting changes to Shrine and Grounds most likely. Either with how you score, when you score, or numbers of points you score (maybe some combo of those). As long as they either lightly touch both or just focus on one and 2/3 remain primarily intact I think we will be okay.
-Then points nerfs. So far it looks like Repentia are going up by 2, Zephyrim are up by 2, and Retributors are up by 2. So 16, 17, and 14 points, respectively. The Zephyrim I expected completely (though I feel like 16 is their sweet spot, so I am hoping its a 1 point change and not just a return to original points). Also there are character nerfs too. I am expecting Vahl to go up again and then maybe all the minor characters get a slight tweak by 5 points or something.
Personally I think the first two nerfs alone would have been enough to put us squarely back in low A tier. Other than Zephyrim going back to 16/17 points I think everything else could have stayed (though more points cuts to our relatively bad motor pool would have been welcome). I still think we will weather this enough and still come out as an upper mid-tier army (high B tier perhaps), especially as Nids, Harlequins, and then the armies losing AoC are all taking pretty heavy hits. There are many points cuts being offered to help the other AoC armies out though, something we seem to be getting the opposite of. It is definitely going to hurt but I am interested to see how we realistically expect all of this to shake out!
I think these are speculative, and not very informative. The loss of AoC is a nightmare for our durability but a good portion of out units never benefited in the first place and Detachment changes likely mean fewer troops. Its most annoying on paragon warsuits and the tanks that didnt need a nerf. We were an army of hide or get shot to bits in the open we still are. The pts changes seem unnecessary given the loss of armour of contempt and are probably to steep on repentia but it won't stop their use as they perform their role better than anything else.
Mission changes could be crippling as they are the only thing making Sisters competative. I would hope for a change to leap I would make it harder to score (you have to commit an extra aof) but the cap of 12 to be lifted so it becomes a build to it and get 15 not an auto score 12. Sacred grounds is difficult to fix without making it unplayable and yes it is big scoring bit Sisters need that to compete
GFdoubles wrote: So based on supposedly "reliable" leaks it looks like several nerfs are incoming for us in the first two weeks of January. What we "know" are as follows:
-AoC is going away (looks like across the board, though there is a version that says TS and GKs keeps it, I doubt it though). If everyone is pretty much losing it I think it's fine. Valorous Heart should go back to its normal benefits then and we may see some more varied Orders in competitive lists again. It is definitely going to be a hit to us, but I think we will end up falling somewhere in low A or high B tier.
- "Minor Secondary Nerfs" are coming for us, which I completely expected. Hopefully it doesn't make anything unplayable though supposedly there will only be 3 faction secondaries now anyway. We just have to see what secondaries get eliminated for us. If they keep our three main ones (Leap, Shrine, and Sacred Grounds) I am expecting changes to Shrine and Grounds most likely. Either with how you score, when you score, or numbers of points you score (maybe some combo of those). As long as they either lightly touch both or just focus on one and 2/3 remain primarily intact I think we will be okay.
-Then points nerfs. So far it looks like Repentia are going up by 2, Zephyrim are up by 2, and Retributors are up by 2. So 16, 17, and 14 points, respectively. The Zephyrim I expected completely (though I feel like 16 is their sweet spot, so I am hoping its a 1 point change and not just a return to original points). Also there are character nerfs too. I am expecting Vahl to go up again and then maybe all the minor characters get a slight tweak by 5 points or something.
Personally I think the first two nerfs alone would have been enough to put us squarely back in low A tier. Other than Zephyrim going back to 16/17 points I think everything else could have stayed (though more points cuts to our relatively bad motor pool would have been welcome). I still think we will weather this enough and still come out as an upper mid-tier army (high B tier perhaps), especially as Nids, Harlequins, and then the armies losing AoC are all taking pretty heavy hits. There are many points cuts being offered to help the other AoC armies out though, something we seem to be getting the opposite of. It is definitely going to hurt but I am interested to see how we realistically expect all of this to shake out!
If all this happens? I could Sisters comfortably dropping into the red zone until the dataslate after.
Forrunately rumours are just that and incomplete ones are imcomplete until it all comes out.
I'm not sure it would be that despairing more a C tier Soup build with three armigers
Vahl 3 units of paragon warsuits 3 armigers comes to about 1500 add on a 60pt DS seraphim objective holder along with 2 Crusaders and 2 assassins as your cheap backfield you have the core of a still reasonable list its just not sistersy
U02dah4 wrote: I'm not sure it would be that despairing more a C tier Soup build with three armigers
Vahl 3 units of paragon warsuits 3 armigers comes to about 1500 add on a 60pt DS seraphim objective holder along with 2 Crusaders and 2 assassins as your cheap backfield you have the core of a still reasonable list its just not sistersy
Losing AoC kills Nundams, unless GW is willing to cut points agressively... they just don't last.
2 model squads won't hold objectives.
I do agree 3x Helverins in every sister list though. Probably with 30 Sacs, 20 Rets with Hospi and 2 Dogmatas.
2 model squads are placeholders to sit on back objectives out of LOS. They perform the same role as BS now which just as easily die to stiff breeze. Its just more pts efficient and easier to hide given the smaller footprint.
It's a massive loss to nundams but they are still efficient damage output wise and if zephrim become inefficient pts wise, then being a high toughness army supported by a couple of reserved repentia seems like the best option to me (even if it is nerfed)
U02dah4 wrote: 2 model squads are placeholders to sit on back objectives out of LOS. They perform the same role as BS now which just as easily die to stiff breeze. Its just more pts efficient and easier to hide given the smaller footprint.
It's a massive loss to nundams but they are still efficient damage output wise and if zephrim become inefficient pts wise, then being a high toughness army supported by a couple of reserved repentia seems like the best option to me (even if it is nerfed)
There are guns 5 sisters survive that 2 Crusaders won't, but that will come down to a lot of ifs and buts.
I expect Zeph to remain compeditive but a little overcosted, they're in the same boat as Repentia and Rets to some degree, though nowhere near the same level.
I think the real question is exactly how much everyone else gets hit around us, especially the other AoC armies that are losing AoC but getting points cuts. The rumors already state that Nids and Harlequins are taking solid hits (more points nerfs to Nids, especially on warriors, and Harlies are supposedly going to a 5++ instead of a 4++). That alone I think is going to keep us in the B tier mix. I think it really just depends on how the other AoC armies come out and if we receive any slight points buffs at all, which probably were just not mentioned because of how comparatively insignificant they were.
Again as we all know we need to take any leaks with salt, but I think even worst case scenario we are going to come out of this mid tier as long as no other faction around us gets an insane buff of some kind.
GFdoubles wrote: I think the real question is exactly how much everyone else gets hit around us, especially the other AoC armies that are losing AoC but getting points cuts. The rumors already state that Nids and Harlequins are taking solid hits (more points nerfs to Nids, especially on warriors, and Harlies are supposedly going to a 5++ instead of a 4++). That alone I think is going to keep us in the B tier mix. I think it really just depends on how the other AoC armies come out and if we receive any slight points buffs at all, which probably were just not mentioned because of how comparatively insignificant they were.
Again as we all know we need to take any leaks with salt, but I think even worst case scenario we are going to come out of this mid tier as long as no other faction around us gets an insane buff of some kind.
Can we consider win percentages instead ot tier ranks?
Not really win percentages are to precise we are 55% now pts changes will negligible effect things AoC will be a 5%ish drop except in the mirror and missions could be anywhere form -10 to -25% its to hard to predict
Gf doubles good point but AoC has more impact the lower the ap of an attack SM use lots of ap1 and ap2 we use lots of ap3 and 4 so it disproportionately benefited us. Xenon and non sm imperium get straight buffed comparatively it's bad. Add to that pts drops well 45%-55% is ideal and we were dropping from 55% it is easy to say without mission tweaks we would be middling with mission tweaks it could be worse exact percentage not a scooby.
I prefer to use the stat check data rather than GW we have hovered at 55%for months of course sampling error will alter that by plus or minus a couple of percent if you look on a weekly basis
The main difference comes from the data being more stratified we have a veteran win rate of 54% in the current sample data but a casual player (first tournament) win rate of 46% - GW smoosh all results together which doesn't really reflect a factions true performance at tournament level
U02dah4 wrote: I prefer to use the stat check data rather than GW we have hovered at 55%for months of course sampling error will alter that by plus or minus a couple of percent if you look on a weekly basis
The main difference comes from the data being more stratified we have a veteran win rate of 54% in the current sample data but a casual player (first tournament) win rate of 46% - GW smoosh all results together which doesn't really reflect a factions true performance at tournament level
I mean, no single metric does...
Automatically Appended Next Post: I probably should clarify too that my low expectation of Sisters is somewhat dependant on GW fixing the passively maxing secondaries issue.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Defend the Shrine is good Sacred ground is better than I expected but slightly worse
Leap however is a mess from auto 12 every game
To something still capped at 12 but more expensive (cost 5 miracle dice) and less reliable spending a 4+ each battle round for 10 with 2 6's wasted to get 12 and there's no guarantee of getting that many every game so probably an avg 10 max12 secondary still atleadt its non interactive and possibly makes a case for the triumph/sanctum
Automatically Appended Next Post: Defend the Shrine is good Sacred ground is better than I expected but slightly worse
Leap however is a mess from auto 12 every game
To something still capped at 12 but more expensive (cost 5 miracle dice) and less reliable spending a 4+ each battle round for 10 with 2 6's wasted to get 12 and there's no guarantee of getting that many every game so probably an avg 10 max12 secondary still atleadt its non interactive and possibly makes a case for the triumph/sanctum
Valorous Heart back to the way it was before means that sisters now have two legitimate options for order traits again. VH Sacresants are still solid, immolators being cheaper than dirt multi-melta profiles now is solid. Leap is still doable and still good in matchups where the opponent doesn't offer a compelling secondary. You just have to be A LOT more careful with your dice. 1, 2,3 is even more painful to roll and 6 is even crazier, which isn't great.
It's an across the board nerf, but it could be worse. It could be like last year at this time when we took 7 compounding nerfs all at once. This one at least has the benefit of opening up another build option. You might even see the custom 'ignore -1' ability see some use now.
Exorcist is still worthless and 5 points saved on a Mortifier is nice but meh.
These changes are definitely much more light handed than I expected. Zephyrim staying at 15 is really nice, as I expected them to at least go to 16 (honestly I would have preferred Repentia going to 15 and Zeph going to 16 but I will take the Repentia nerf). Immolators and Exorcists going down is very nice, though I am in agreement that the Exorcist is still pretty bad due to the indirect fire nerf that simultaneously helps us against Tau and others but hurts such an iconic unit. However, with AoC going away I may be putting one or two back in very casual lists when I play with noobs learning the game or good friends that have less than stellar collections. At least AP -2 kind of means something again.
The secondary missions came out better than I expected. Shrine not being changed is really nice, Sacred Grounds going back to 4 points instead of 5 makes sense and as long as you can still score it in the same way with multiple units doing it each turn I think it is still really solid in most missions. Honestly I expected that one to get gutted so I will just take a return to the 4 VP scored on objectives outside deployment zone as going to 5 VP was just unnecessary. Leap is definitely something I am going to have to play and practice with to see exactly how best to score it. With the change I think if you take it you only use MD for auto-passing charges, key melta damage to kill something, and an incredibly clutch 4+ save on something like Vahl. Overall this is what we wanted to use them on anyway so I think it just means we need to more carefully prioritize what we use them on during the game compared to what we ae ditching to score points. Be very careful as ERJAK says.
Finally I guess I am actually bumping my Sacresants up to 20 now lol. I have always loved Valorous Heart so competitively I may be just going back to them. I think Warsuits might still be viable in VH too, though probably only one squad instead of the 2 or 3 I have seen in many lists lately. I am just happy to see BR have some competition again!
While this is definitely a nerf to the army I think we came out better than the leaks suggested and with other S tier armies taking big hits I still think we are going to shake out in B tier with a high 40%-low 50% win percentage. Guard, Admech, and maybe even Marines will probably rule the roost to some degree again along with maybe Custodes and possibly a few lower tier armies too, but we may even find ourselves in low A tier at least when playing VH and maybe even BR still.
Leap is discard dice from the sounds of it not perform acts of faith. So those guaranteed charges mean you don't have a 6 for leap.
We were not s tier before we were pretty balanced and now we are probably C tier its enough that I'm considering jumping to one of my other armies. AoC and leap are big hits particularly when many other armies got significantly buffed by comparison.
Could it have been worse absolutely but the changes are incentiviseing alpha strikes at a time when our durability has been shot to bits. Once the new codex hits in Guard Ironhands and mechanicus all go from easy wins to probable losses while armies like BA who were balanced with us are now slight advantage over us I feel like before I had a reasonable 4-2 chance and now its 3-3 or lower with bad match ups
I feel like with Leap you often won't NEED to discard that 6. As long as you get some 4s and 5s and can keep 6s and some 3s you should be okay. As long as you can discard any number of dice per turn if you have a 4 and a 2 or something that's 3 VP for that turn. Do that for 4 turns and you max it. If you can only discard 1 MD per turn though then that's where things will definitely get messy. I really want to read the full secondary before making a final judgement on it.
I agree we got hit hard, but I am still hopeful our best lists in VH and BR will still be able to have play into most A tier factions from mid-upper B tier. Everything else may sit in C tier but I think we will still have builds that let us punch above C tier.
Also, and this is such a noob question but I feel like I have been playing this wrong now for the last like year and change. Since you generate Miracle Dice at the start of the turn and on each battle round, should I technically be getting 3 MD at base in each battle round? So if I am going first I get one for the player turn and one for the battle round starting, followed by one for my opponent's turn? Then vice versa if my opponent goes first I get one for their turn and one for the battle round followed by the one for my turn?
I hate to even ask this, but I recently watched some batreps where I saw that happening and it made me second guess everything. Or does the player turn rule just replace the battle round rule so it is still just 2 base MD each turn, you and your opponent's (which is the way I have been playing it)?
Thanks in advance for the clarification, I just feel like such an idiot right now and want to make sure one way or the other.
GFdoubles wrote: I feel like with Leap you often won't NEED to discard that 6. As long as you get some 4s and 5s and can keep 6s and some 3s you should be okay. As long as you can discard any number of dice per turn if you have a 4 and a 2 or something that's 3 VP for that turn. Do that for 4 turns and you max it. If you can only discard 1 MD per turn though then that's where things will definitely get messy. I really want to read the full secondary before making a final judgement on it.
According to TT Tactics, it is just 1 die per Battle Round with a maximum of 12 VP for the Secondary. You'll need 3 4-5's and 2 6's to max it out in 5 Rounds.
Also, and this is such a noob question but I feel like I have been playing this wrong now for the last like year and change. Since you generate Miracle Dice at the start of the turn and on each battle round, should I technically be getting 3 MD at base in each battle round? So if I am going first I get one for the player turn and one for the battle round starting, followed by one for my opponent's turn? Then vice versa if my opponent goes first I get one for their turn and one for the battle round followed by the one for my turn?
I hate to even ask this, but I recently watched some batreps where I saw that happening and it made me second guess everything. Or does the player turn rule just replace the battle round rule so it is still just 2 base MD each turn, you and your opponent's (which is the way I have been playing it)?
Balance Dataslate changes it from 1 per Battle Round to one per Player Turn. You only get 2 per Battle Round (1 each player turn) outside of earning them.
Now on a completely different subject, I went over the new MFM and it is amazing how close we are to the codex when it comes to unit cost. I didn't note one upgrade cost changed, and only the following units don't match the codex (Italic if change in this MFM):
Morvenn Vahl 280 (+15)
Triumph of Saint Katherine 220 (-20)
Paragon Warsuits 210 (-30)
Sisters Repentia 16 each (+2)* Dominion Squad 14 each (+2)
Seraphim Squad 12 each (-2)
Zephyrim Squad 15 each (-2)
Castigator 135 (-15)
Exorcist 120 (-30)*
Mortifiers 55 each (-5)* Penitent Engines 50 each (-5)
Immolator 90 (-30)*
I guess GW wants us to use more tanks and less Repentia
GFdoubles wrote: I feel like with Leap you often won't NEED to discard that 6. As long as you get some 4s and 5s and can keep 6s and some 3s you should be okay. As long as you can discard any number of dice per turn if you have a 4 and a 2 or something that's 3 VP for that turn. Do that for 4 turns and you max it. If you can only discard 1 MD per turn though then that's where things will definitely get messy. I really want to read the full secondary before making a final judgement on it.
According to TT Tactics, it is just 1 die per Battle Round with a maximum of 12 VP for the Secondary. You'll need 3 4-5's and 2 6's to max it out in 5 Rounds.
Also, and this is such a noob question but I feel like I have been playing this wrong now for the last like year and change. Since you generate Miracle Dice at the start of the turn and on each battle round, should I technically be getting 3 MD at base in each battle round? So if I am going first I get one for the player turn and one for the battle round starting, followed by one for my opponent's turn? Then vice versa if my opponent goes first I get one for their turn and one for the battle round followed by the one for my turn?
I hate to even ask this, but I recently watched some batreps where I saw that happening and it made me second guess everything. Or does the player turn rule just replace the battle round rule so it is still just 2 base MD each turn, you and your opponent's (which is the way I have been playing it)?
Balance Dataslate changes it from 1 per Battle Round to one per Player Turn. You only get 2 per Battle Round (1 each player turn) outside of earning them.
Now on a completely different subject, I went over the new MFM and it is amazing how close we are to the codex when it comes to unit cost. I didn't note one upgrade cost changed, and only the following units don't match the codex (Italic if change in this MFM):
Morvenn Vahl 280 (+15)
Triumph of Saint Katherine 220 (-20)
Paragon Warsuits 210 (-30)
Sisters Repentia 16 each (+2)* Dominion Squad 14 each (+2)
Seraphim Squad 12 each (-2)
Zephyrim Squad 15 each (-2)
Castigator 135 (-15)
Exorcist 120 (-30)*
Mortifiers 55 each (-5)* Penitent Engines 50 each (-5)
Immolator 90 (-30)*
I guess GW wants us to use more tanks and less Repentia
Thanks for the clarification that I at least have been playing the correct way the last 10 months or whatever lol.
If what TT is reading about Leap is right then it definitely becomes far more difficult. Definitely not unplayable but far more RNG based unfortunately. I am really hoping it is more than just 1 die per turn, but if it is it could still be fair to try and get 8-10 off of honestly. We will just have to weigh it up against some of the other generic secondaries.
Unfortunately our motor pool is just not great. The Castigator is still pretty much the most effective general purpose tank we have unless you take 3+ MM Immolators and T7 with 11 wounds is still just not great in the game. The Exorcist has been hurt ever since it changed from the 8th book. Had it kept AP -3 on the anti-tank missiles and at least 12 wounds on its profile then losing T8 I think would have been manageable to some degree. But T7, 11 wounds, and AP -2 on somethign that should be dedicated anti-tank is just so meh. It is great to see the tank chassis itself come down but they really just need to make those anti-tank missiles cost less, like 20 points max and probably 15. The Exorcist at 135 with its big missiles and 120 with the anti-infantry ones might see SOME play as a utility option. However, the main reason you were bringing this version of it (and probably even a 135 point version) is to have it hide out of LoS and with indirect fire nerfed that kills it. Granted I realize that this also helps us as an army, but this poor Exorcist has just been hurt so much in 9th. I would gladly pay 160 points for AP -3 missiles even at T7 and 11 wounds (at least in casual games), but the way it is now it just doesn't do enough to justify 150, and maybe not even at 135. The Rhino is still our best metal box it seems lol.
So as much as GW wants us to use our tanks, the Rhino and Castigator is still the only things that will probably see play, and MAYBE a few MM Immolators, though that is debatable. I have to write to GW about fixing the Exorcist soon, I feel so strongly about that poor tank getting nerfed. It is so iconic and now it just never sees play because of what they have done to it. It was almost perfect in the 8th edition book, they finally gave it the glow up it needed, and I would even argue it should have retained its AP -4 missiles from the index and beta codex. But I understand that with 3d3 shots compared to 1d6 the AP was going to have come down a bit. It still wasn't worth 190 or 200 points or whatever, but the hits it has taken just to drop 40-50 points is just so sad. I will always be salty about that organ tank until they fix it.
I guess GW wants us to use more tanks and less Repentia
They have pretty much maxed repentia sales(only so many each player needs) and not much tanks been sold
I love that myth.
GW are responding to the fact that every list runs 3 squads of Repentia (because they slay) and no one runs Exos and Immos('cause they are trash). Ideally every winning army would run 1 of each unit, like 1 Castigator.
Only problem with that is you don't sell anything if you make a faction terrible to play you just have to look at mechanicus before these changes to see that. Unfortunately they have made Sisters broadly reliant on 1 strategy to win so everyone will still take repentia they will just go from winning half there games to 40%
We were balanced at 54% for veterans. Maybe I'm pessimistic but I don't see any viable route for Sisters in an ironhands alpha meta but the data will out we have reduced pts reduced secondaries and reduced durability while other factions gained 1/8 in pts I don't see the balance I hope you prove me wrong but in the meantime I thing I'm swapping faction
U02dah4 wrote: We were balanced at 54% for veterans. Maybe I'm pessimistic but I don't see any viable route for Sisters in an ironhands alpha meta but the data will out we have reduced pts reduced secondaries and reduced durability while other factions gained 1/8 in pts I don't see the balance I hope you prove me wrong but in the meantime I thing I'm swapping faction
Iron Hands alpha is older than free rein Admech, and that hasn't kept up.
Does that mean I think Sisters will keep up? No. But I wouldn't rule sisters out either. We still have the power to max secondaries by not interacting with out opponent. And that's still powerful.
So I have been seeing some content creators discuss how, even though Sisters are realistically C tier to low B tier right now at best, they might play spoiler to many strong marine lists that may become the new meta. While IH and other top (S tier) Marine lists may be out of reach for now, we may be able to handle many A tier marine factions. We might become a bit of an anti-meta choice that might have us seeing play even toward some top tables at certain events.
While it is definitely not ideal, it at least keeps us somewhat viable as an army that deals with a marine heavy meta. Only time will tell of course, but I am interested to see if this ends up being true as we begin to head into the new edition over the next 6 months.
And that's assuming marines are even among top though...AoC loss hurts. Sure free gear but how much is that really worth on soft bodies that are going to be shot off board faster than ever. They got shot off easily pre-AOC and firepower has just increased since then.
tneva82 wrote: And that's assuming marines are even among top though...AoC loss hurts. Sure free gear but how much is that really worth on soft bodies that are going to be shot off board faster than ever. They got shot off easily pre-AOC and firepower has just increased since then.
Old Doctrines are the Marine buff.
I don't see Sisters being a counter meta pick, at least not over any other army and not more than before. We will live through secondaries or die. If anything, our lists will go to pre AoC days
GFdoubles wrote: So I have been seeing some content creators discuss how, even though Sisters are realistically C tier to low B tier right now at best, they might play spoiler to many strong marine lists that may become the new meta. While IH and other top (S tier) Marine lists may be out of reach for now, we may be able to handle many A tier marine factions. We might become a bit of an anti-meta choice that might have us seeing play even toward some top tables at certain events.
While it is definitely not ideal, it at least keeps us somewhat viable as an army that deals with a marine heavy meta. Only time will tell of course, but I am interested to see if this ends up being true as we begin to head into the new edition over the next 6 months.
Sisters pulled a dead 50% winrate with 5 X-0/X-1 lists at LVO. Several lists in the top 32 (though none in the top 16).
Exactly where we want to be. Good enough to do well if played well, not good enough to catch nerfs.
GFdoubles wrote: So I have been seeing some content creators discuss how, even though Sisters are realistically C tier to low B tier right now at best, they might play spoiler to many strong marine lists that may become the new meta. While IH and other top (S tier) Marine lists may be out of reach for now, we may be able to handle many A tier marine factions. We might become a bit of an anti-meta choice that might have us seeing play even toward some top tables at certain events.
While it is definitely not ideal, it at least keeps us somewhat viable as an army that deals with a marine heavy meta. Only time will tell of course, but I am interested to see if this ends up being true as we begin to head into the new edition over the next 6 months.
Sisters pulled a dead 50% winrate with 5 X-0/X-1 lists at LVO. Several lists in the top 32 (though none in the top 16).
Exactly where we want to be. Good enough to do well if played well, not good enough to catch nerfs.
Well one list also placed just outside of the top 10 at that Uprising Adelaide event I believe, and that was AoO. I think that Bloody Rose list placed 11th if I am not mistaken.
Not saying that we are good, but when played well we still have a shot at placing fairly well in AoO. I believe our final win rate there was around 47% as well, which is not good but that doesn't feel as horrible as most expected us to be.
I know this data is early of course, but it definitely doesn't seem like we are truly a "C" tier faction at least, and I will take it.
GFdoubles wrote: Well one list also placed just outside of the top 10 at that Uprising Adelaide event I believe, and that was AoO. I think that Bloody Rose list placed 11th if I am not mistaken.
Not saying that we are good, but when played well we still have a shot at placing fairly well in AoO. I believe our final win rate there was around 47% as well, which is not good but that doesn't feel as horrible as most expected us to be.
I know this data is early of course, but it definitely doesn't seem like we are truly a "C" tier faction at least, and I will take it.
We were always going to be better than people expected. They misunderstand how good Leap is, for one example...
Thing is, I don't expect our WR to get better. We don't have any real new tricks. Bu the end of it i could see up dropping into the low 40s.
U02dah4 wrote: And just hit 40% more like what I was expecting
I like how the Adepticon meta has been by far the worst meta for all of 9th edition, specifically because it's the only large national event I go to.
Looking at the data, they'll end up doing what they did after they destroyed the meta before the LAST adepticon. They'll implement some huge sweeping change in july that makes 40k fun to play until february when they kill it again.
Well while we are definitely low on the list according to GW's meta article, we are still holding at around a 45% win rate. I will take it personally. it definitely looks worse than it is as most factions look to be in the 45%-50% win rate currently, with only a few factions above or below that. Plus that article is only based on a few weeks of tournament results, so I think some of it is definitely skewed, especially for a faction like GSC. It really seems like we are in an okay spot currently, at least as far as GW's win rate hopes are concerned (45=55% WR for most armies). If we were expecting low 40s I think we are at least going to avoid that (at least until "10th edition" hits).
Interesting. I wonder whether Stats Check or GW are using a wider net in the data pool?
Either way, I think it is very telling that Sisters have fallen hard since AOC was removed. Not surprising given we got barely any points reductions while Space Marines got a whole raft of them and improved Combat Doctrines as AoO began.
alextroy wrote: Interesting. I wonder whether Stats Check or GW are using a wider net in the data pool?
Either way, I think it is very telling that Sisters have fallen hard since AOC was removed. Not surprising given we got barely any points reductions while Space Marines got a whole raft of them and improved Combat Doctrines as AoO began.
If we take the average percentage from stats check and GW you get about 43% win rate so that might be about as accurate as we can get right now, depending on exactly what kind of data pool each source is using. I agree it has definitely been a hard fall from where we were, but without Iron Hands factored in most codex Marines are probably more around our win rate, especially since Blood Angels are just below us according to GW. The loss of AoC has affected so many, even Marines with all of their free wargear. It is an incredibly interesting state for the game, as I am still heartened by the fact that so many factions are within that 45-50% win rate and almost all are within GW's "goal" of 45%-55%. It feels like when the game is relatively healthy we always suffer and when it is dominated by a few top factions we are doing better somehow as a sort of anti-meta choice. Either way though, it definitely beats where we were back in the day (7th and before).
Looking at where DG is at though on GW's ranking, I do admit that I can only take some of their results with grains of salt. With such a durability hit on an army that really needs it to be viable, Death Guard should be around where we are at best. Even with all of the Admech buffs, they are still just barely better than where they were. I guess I am just trying to say it could always be worse, we aren't at the bottom at least!
It's where you have to look at the subfaction metadata and gw don't do that
Eg.
Lucius/mars 52.4% wins 77% games
Lucius 53% 43 games
Mars 52 % 66 games
These are doing pretty well
Ryza/stygies/ aggripina 37.4% wins 23% games
Ryza 42% 19 games
Stygies 40% 5 games
Aggripinaa 25% 8 games
Data Horde no tourney data but I've seen lists do well casually
These are not great but at a quarter of games they are knocking down admech win rate
The other way of looking at it is
Veteran player admech win rate 66% newcomer 22%
It's a high skill threshold faction with few players. New players jumping in will take time to get oriented and so I would expect their win percentage isn't where it will be its a faction in flux with a number of viable lists.
As to DG the meta data shows they have a solid game Into the melee armies but get obliterated by the shooting armies it's holding them roughly Evan and is probably stable it's based more on who they get paired into
. I was running Bloody Rose with Morvenn Vahl, a single 
