We get no ranged weapons higher than str 10 and precious few of them as MM are only str 9 which for the supposed premier tank killers is just dumb.
You cant even put dominions in a Immolator anymore. Only units you can put in them is Sacrosants or Retributers as basic Celestians are just outright gone...
Dominions locked to 10 models and Retributers locked to 5.
I don't think Sister will be as straightforward as other armies. You're going to need to be ok with losing models and units to pick up MD and leverage the +1/+1. There does appear to be at least some tools to help.
- Litanies of Faith does a good job at getting you rerolled MD
- Vahl gives full rerolls to hit and wound to Paragons
- Retributors replace MD twice
- Battle Sisters easily generate MD
- Aestred gives DW melee or you can put Agatha in with Retributors and push the MD from 4s to 5s for the wound roll ( but I think would be better served in a melee unit )
- Dialogus can turn any die for Retributors into a 6
- Retributors hopping out of an Immolator get full wound rerolls
That's not a glass canon army but a fething glass army who needs to jump through several hoops for just a bit of canon, and they were anyways already slower than Eldar(actual glass canon army that also pretty much has MD) but now most of the few units with some speed are just bad on top, either Sisters just got turned into a Horde army and became dirt cheap, or Matt Ward must be back for real this time.
None of those options really scale well into large games.
To get the most out of MD you would need to field MSU. But you cant really do that as all the cheap units you would want to sacrifice are locked to 10 models.
So now we have an army where to actually use our best units they have to be damaged but they are so fragile they are likely to just be destroyed outright.
Sisters have always been an elite alpha strike army but now half our stuff only works if our units are damaged or destroyed. We literally have to be losing for our army to work which is just stupid.
Mythantor wrote: Oh and we're rocking guard level leadership now.
Sisters at the start of 3e were BS 3 and their heaviest tank was a rhino with strength 6 heavy flamer instead of a stormbolter.
Ruleset resets can be cruel, nothing you can do except see how it pans out. Glass half full if you can win with an army when it is crap you'll improve your play for when it isn't.
You know the term "mansplaining"? This is Daedsplaining. You're not necessarily wrong, you usually have some justification for your posts, but you don't play sisters and it doesn't really help to point out gak to people who know the army better than you. Normally I find ERJAK's causticity to be inappropriate, but I look forward to them laying into this list of cope.
thats not mansplaining at all lol, he's just pointing out positives, sorry if its not negative enough for your liking i guess
Pretty sure the Sisters players read the same rules that he did, with the added benefit being that they actually play Sisters and have a better sense of how these things might play out on the table. I can tell you that even with reduced lethality, it's not exactly tough to wipe sisters, and so relying on the +1/+1 thing is just... not going to work out that well in practice?
And not sure why you're accusing me of being incessantly negative; I haven't been commenting that much on these rules.
You know the term "mansplaining"? This is Daedsplaining. You're not necessarily wrong, you usually have some justification for your posts, but you don't play sisters and it doesn't really help to point out gak to people who know the army better than you. Normally I find ERJAK's causticity to be inappropriate, but I look forward to them laying into this list of cope.
thats not mansplaining at all lol, he's just pointing out positives, sorry if its not negative enough for your liking i guess
Pretty sure the Sisters players read the same rules that he did, with the added benefit being that they actually play Sisters and have a better sense of how these things might play out on the table. I can tell you that even with reduced lethality, it's not exactly tough to wipe sisters, and so relying on the +1/+1 thing is just... not going to work out that well in practice?
And not sure why you're accusing me of being incessantly negative; I haven't been commenting that much on these rules.
Yeh relying on a t3 unit that is locked at 5 models to survive a round of shooting. To get the +1 to wound which is the useful part a Retributer has to be reduced to 2 models which means you have already lost half your firepower. Because of the way hit modifiers work now they can never hit on better than a 3+ as hit modifiers dont stack and they can get +1 by standing still.
Gene St. Ealer wrote: Pretty sure the Sisters players read the same rules that he did, with the added benefit being that they actually play Sisters and have a better sense of how these things might play out on the table. I can tell you that even with reduced lethality, it's not exactly tough to wipe sisters, and so relying on the +1/+1 thing is just... not going to work out that well in practice?
And not sure why you're accusing me of being incessantly negative; I haven't been commenting that much on these rules.
I will accept the term of Daedsplaining, but let me elaborate on why I post this info.
We have an OP that gives no additional context. So what are people who are not familiar with the army going to come in here and do? Do they have any information to process? How can they judge if this assessment is accurate? We know that there's more to these sheets than just the units themselves.
So, are we here to have a discussion or are we just here to nod and agree?
tneva82 wrote: Ahyes. In edition where durability goes up sisters supposed to jupt delete units at will as before.
Reduced lethality great as long as apply only your opponent eh?
Ah yes in an Edition where durability goes up and more than one army can still easily just delete stuff left and right, Sisters aka a relatively slow + mostly close range glas canon army still barely have any durability, the damage output of Sisters just goes drastically down, their interactions like auras , anti psyker, unit sizes, etc... just get worse and many new interactions are written in a master of none(which is exactly the opposite of what Sisters need)-way(like the Castigator with it's schizophrenic autocanons and battle canon for example), they effectively get even slower than before and a bit less range, they randomly lose a type of unit(Celestians) and what is the trade-off: a better version of an Order rule that for a very good reason never really worked competetively in an army like Sisters and the hope to get lucky enough with MD...
GW's marketing fairy tales were never great to begin with, and a slow + low range glass canon army without any lethality so obviously don't works that even they should've been able to recognize that.....
It's a bit of a change, but that remainder unit makes for good throw-away models to pick up MD. The Dominion boltguns are now A1 RF2 with Assault and the models can reroll advance rolls. So they can run hard and gum up objectives while still being able to shoot while the other half does their thing.
The Immolator went from T7 to T10 so a boost over the rhino level stats, but I wouldn't shy from Rhinos, either.
Gene St. Ealer wrote: Pretty sure the Sisters players read the same rules that he did
And often a couple hours isn't enough time to actually process this amount of rules.
Didn't stop you from jumping in though to say that it's not so bad! It's a two way street. Again, it's a new edition with a new paradigm, but there's enough info out there for Sisters players to generally say "hmm, we don't seem very well-suited to this".
tneva82 wrote: Ahyes. In edition where durability goes up sisters supposed to jupt delete units at will as before.
Reduced lethality great as long as apply only your opponent eh?
Sisters durability went down.
There seems to be fairly easy access to a 4++ and a 5+++ without locking out other characters. I don't know the points obviously and it'd be gakky to be forced into those characters to be viable, but with the changes to transports the humble Rhino is very valuable.
Gene St. Ealer wrote: Pretty sure the Sisters players read the same rules that he did
And often a couple hours isn't enough time to actually process this amount of rules.
Didn't stop you from jumping in though to say that it's not so bad! It's a two way street. Again, it's a new edition with a new paradigm, but there's enough info out there for Sisters players to generally say "hmm, we don't seem very well-suited to this".
I jumped in with relevant info. I don't think my initial post was overtly positive.
I've already been pretty clear in other areas that MM is still a good anti-tank weapon and people just aren't used to wounding on 5s. I get the sense that Sisters might be character heavy, but again...points.
Lets not forget another big part of MM nerf is that they went down to 18" range. As a Sisters player losing those 6" is gonna be painful as heck with how vulnerable we are to melee.
tneva82 wrote: Ahyes. In edition where durability goes up sisters supposed to jupt delete units at will as before.
Reduced lethality great as long as apply only your opponent eh?
Sisters durability went down.
There seems to be fairly easy access to a 4++ and a 5+++ without locking out other characters. I don't know the points obviously and it'd be gakky to be forced into those characters to be viable, but with the changes to transports the humble Rhino is very valuable.
4++ on Nundams is great. Exactly what they needed. But those characters seem to just be more points to kill in 1 unit.
Yea it feels like Sisters are a lot like TS in becoming an army the operates best at mid-range. I do most of the work at 18 to 24". Sisters are better at melee than TS is though barring Magnus or the odd DP. ( And Tzaangors might be useful ).
I think the biggest problem will be for newer Sisters players who don't have a deep bench and find themselves scrambling for models...which will be a lot of them considering how many joined with the refresh.
Daedalus81 wrote: Yea it feels like Sisters are a lot like TS in becoming an army the operates best at mid-range. I do most of the work at 18 to 24". Sisters are better at melee than TS is though barring Magnus or the odd DP. ( And Tzaangors might be useful ).
I think the biggest problem will be for newer Sisters players who don't have a deep bench and find themselves scrambling for models...which will be a lot of them considering how many joined with the refresh.
Sisters have always been a cqc army, hence the heavy lean into melee in recent editions. If you're already in that range...
Daedalus81 wrote: Yea it feels like Sisters are a lot like TS in becoming an army the operates best at mid-range. I do most of the work at 18 to 24". Sisters are better at melee than TS is though barring Magnus or the odd DP. ( And Tzaangors might be useful ).
I think the biggest problem will be for newer Sisters players who don't have a deep bench and find themselves scrambling for models...which will be a lot of them considering how many joined with the refresh.
I think you mean 6-12" range MM got nerfed range now need to be in 9" to get melta buff.
I think the biggest problem will be for newer Sisters players who don't have a deep bench and find themselves scrambling for models...which will be a lot of them considering how many joined with the refresh.
Hmmm, this seems like that's what GW wants.....
Well, my Bloody Rose is gonna remain on the shelf. Or not as I'm sure I can play 30k militia with them, so not all is lost. Just no 40k
tneva82 wrote: Ahyes. In edition where durability goes up sisters supposed to jupt delete units at will as before.
Reduced lethality great as long as apply only your opponent eh?
It is all nice and good till you see that eldar aren't locked in to 10 man units, have bigger mobility, incomperable higher raw damage and not just damage potential, and are more resiliance. Then we can talk about how 10th is an edition where stuff doesn't get deleted anymore. But even if you were right, anti tank units that can't kill tanks and can't survive being shot back is bad design in an edition where you put focus on vehicles.
And often a couple hours isn't enough time to actually process this amount of rules.
Daedalus please, people had the rules for longer then a few hours. If I could get my hands on the index a week before, then some dudes in UK can easily get a month, or so, head start. That is why everyone is calling out inconsistancies within the rules or how rules differ between different language versions.
Mythantor wrote: I think you mean 6-12" range MM got nerfed range now need to be in 9" to get melta buff.
For maximum effect, yea, but I think the idea is to try and push damage via MD. A couple 6s is as good as a prism in that sense ( obviously not in any other regard ).
I think Sisters is going to be high ceiling trying to manage / generate MD and dealing with losses.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Karol wrote: Daedalus please, people had the rules for longer then a few hours. If I could get my hands on the index a week before, then some dudes in UK can easily get a month, or so, head start. That is why everyone is calling out inconsistancies within the rules or how rules differ between different language versions.
So you had the index and shared nothing about them?
This post was not started by someone with advanced access. People calling out inconsistencies are those with early access, either. What you're seeing is a huge collective of people all looking at something at the same time and noticing different things. Let's be serious here.
Mythantor wrote: I think you mean 6-12" range MM got nerfed range now need to be in 9" to get melta buff.
For maximum effect, yea, but I think the idea is to try and push damage via MD. A couple 6s is as good as a prism in that sense ( obviously not in any other regard ).
I think Sisters is going to be high ceiling trying to manage / generate MD and dealing with losses.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Karol wrote: Daedalus please, people had the rules for longer then a few hours. If I could get my hands on the index a week before, then some dudes in UK can easily get a month, or so, head start. That is why everyone is calling out inconsistancies within the rules or how rules differ between different language versions.
So you had the index and shared nothing about them?
This post was not started by someone with advanced access. People calling out inconsistencies are those with early access, either. What you're seeing is a huge collective of people all looking at something at the same time and noticing different things. Let's be serious here.
Cant us a MD to set the damage roll if you need to use it to gaurantee the wound.
So you had the index and shared nothing about them?
I asked if it was okey to do it and I was told it was illegal to share rules and point costs, before the premier. So I ain't doing that.
I get the wait and see approche etc. But the riot about eldar real does have a base. Some "broken" stuff is just funny like the GK chaplain having a worse nemezis force weapon or str 6 thunder hammers. There are very powerful, IMO as I ain't no tournament or good player, army in index 10th. IG, marines of the primaris kind , the DE. But Eldar really do have that 9th ed pre nerf DE feel or Votan. And while I was dead against changes to Votan, the box has been opened. There is no going back to, no big nerfs pre release times. Now GW can ignore the community, they did so in the past. But it will feel like favouritism. And I guess non eldar players will not like it.
Plus getting rules in advance is hardly a new thing. I mean, before GW laid off their playtesters, some people had an oddly ready to play specific army builds for tournament play day one. To be honest I don't care about it that much, AoS is , with all its flaws and lower support, becoming my main game more and more. But I still think GW should care about its player base a bit more.
Some of the stuff they did was vicious. The Custodes change to axes and vexhila is brutal. GW knows people had all ax allarus and wardens. They know, because they wrote the rules, that people are going to have 1 vexila per army.
I guess it doesn't matter for people who buy fresh armies, but for people with existing armies, this is horrible. How many people, instead of quiting or shelfing the army, are going to buy 2-3x2 boxes just to be able to have legal optimised units? On top of that they know full well that the custodes army is like 50% FW units, yet non of the FW units are in the index. And then to rub it in, they leave the contemptor for custodes, but remove them for marines.
But then again this is my second edition change, so I should not be suprised that GW stops to care about you as soon as you buy an army.
Understood. I'm thinking the damage roll is the most impactful place to use it. Wound rolls will have to be rerolls from Immolator or the impractical +1 from less than half a BSS squad.
In general I don't think wound rolls will be a huge problem, but I can see how the curve could create some feels bad moments.
There's a dynamic with Sisters where you don't want to kill them and give up the MD, but you also don't want to leave them wounded. I don't know which end of that will win out and if the extra MD from losing units will be beneficial to the overall game state.
People calling out inconsistencies are those with early access, either. What you're seeing is a huge collective of people all looking at something at the same time and noticing different things. Let's be serious here.
how many second after seeing Dark Artisan and the old liquifires and the point costs of DE units, did it take for the community to understand that something was wrong. Even the playtesters were acting up when talking about DE and later Ad Mecha.
Sisters are mechanicaly bad. Conditional stuff will always be worse then unconditional stuff, unless the conditions are writen in a such a way that they are auto met. forcing an MSU style of a build, while at the same time making people play with 10 size squads is bad design. No real efficient anwser to tanks or monsters, is bad design too. It wouldn't be as much of a bad design, if there weren't armies that will be just deleting tanks, infantry, elites etc.
Plus, and I agree with you here, that no many people like the idea of, and now you are going to buy 10+ boxes, because from the army you used nothing really works anymore. Then you will assemble and paint it, because the painted rule is still in. meanwhile people with other armies are going to be playing with the same stuff they had since 6th ed.
People calling out inconsistencies are those with early access, either. What you're seeing is a huge collective of people all looking at something at the same time and noticing different things. Let's be serious here.
how many second after seeing Dark Artisan and the old liquifires and the point costs of DE units, did it take for the community to understand that something was wrong. Even the playtesters were acting up when talking about DE and later Ad Mecha.
Sisters are mechanicaly bad. Conditional stuff will always be worse then unconditional stuff, unless the conditions are writen in a such a way that they are auto met. forcing an MSU style of a build, while at the same time making people play with 10 size squads is bad design. No real efficient anwser to tanks or monsters, is bad design too. It wouldn't be as much of a bad design, if there weren't armies that will be just deleting tanks, infantry, elites etc.
Plus, and I agree with you here, that no many people like the idea of, and now you are going to buy 10+ boxes, because from the army you used nothing really works anymore. Then you will assemble and paint it, because the painted rule is still in. meanwhile people with other armies are going to be playing with the same stuff they had since 6th ed.
First of all I don't buy into you having had points for stuff etc for weeks now. Want in points for 3 totally random units and we can check back in 2 days. The flip side being, is this only talking about competitive lists or are people generally suggesting casual games for sisters are no benuo?
Mythantor wrote: I think you mean 6-12" range MM got nerfed range now need to be in 9" to get melta buff.
For maximum effect, yea, but I think the idea is to try and push damage via MD. A couple 6s is as good as a prism in that sense ( obviously not in any other regard ).
I think Sisters is going to be high ceiling trying to manage / generate MD and dealing with losses.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Karol wrote: Daedalus please, people had the rules for longer then a few hours. If I could get my hands on the index a week before, then some dudes in UK can easily get a month, or so, head start. That is why everyone is calling out inconsistancies within the rules or how rules differ between different language versions.
So you had the index and shared nothing about them?
This post was not started by someone with advanced access. People calling out inconsistencies are those with early access, either. What you're seeing is a huge collective of people all looking at something at the same time and noticing different things. Let's be serious here.
Cant us a MD to set the damage roll if you need to use it to gaurantee the wound.
Mythantor wrote: I think you mean 6-12" range MM got nerfed range now need to be in 9" to get melta buff.
For maximum effect, yea, but I think the idea is to try and push damage via MD.
I think MD is a Red Herring. It is just 1/phase/unit and it has to be activated before any dice are rolled so you can't just safety net your rolls it is "substitute or die". And if the stars don't align and you end up with low MD results and no super special characters to do something about it then sucks2bU.
HÖWEVER, you can push out a crapton of re-rolls: Canoness re-rolls hits (and can tank some damage with her one-phase 2+ invu), Immolator allows re-rolling wounds, and Vahl re-rolls everything, so you can have, say, 3 Retributors and 1 Nundams re-roll everything ever and that's pretty nice.
I think Sisters is going to be high ceiling trying to manage / generate MD and dealing with losses.
Saying something is "high ceiling" without knowing points is basically tantamount to saying it doesn't look that great (i.e. for this stuff to be good, you're reliant on cheapness/luckiness or your opponent to make bad decisions). Why can't you just be open with that?
tneva82 wrote: Ahyes. In edition where durability goes up sisters supposed to jupt delete units at will as before.
Reduced lethality great as long as apply only your opponent eh?
Id just settle for our anti-tank squad being able to wound the average tank on better than a 5+
This seems to be a trend. Tyranids only have a few weapons that do more than 3 Damage. Most of the non-heavy anti-tank guns (blasters, meltas) wound rhinos on a 5+.
Unless vehicles get a significant points increase, it feels like vehicle durability might be a problem in early 10th.
I don't miss Armor Values and the Vehicle Damage chart, but at least anti-tank guns could reliably hurt tanks under that system. Blasters only wounding rhinos on a 5+ compared to a splinter rifle's 6+ feels really weird.
tneva82 wrote: Ahyes. In edition where durability goes up sisters supposed to jupt delete units at will as before.
Reduced lethality great as long as apply only your opponent eh?
Id just settle for our anti-tank squad being able to wound the average tank on better than a 5+
This seems to be a trend. Tyranids only have a few weapons that do more than 3 Damage. Most of the non-heavy anti-tank guns (blasters, meltas) wound rhinos on a 5+.
Unless vehicles get a significant points increase, it feels like vehicle durability might be a problem in early 10th.
I don't miss Armor Values and the Vehicle Damage chart, but at least anti-tank guns could reliably hurt tanks under that system. Blasters only wounding rhinos on a 5+ compared to a splinter rifle's 6+ feels really weird.
Difference is even our heavy weapons lack str as well.
Lascannons are str 12 ffs.
I think Sisters is going to be high ceiling trying to manage / generate MD and dealing with losses.
Saying something is "high ceiling" without knowing points is basically tantamount to saying it doesn't look that great (i.e. for this stuff to be good, you're reliant on cheapness/luckiness or your opponent to make bad decisions). Why can't you just be open with that?
Because they do have good stuff and it's quite complicated. If you were to take missions out of 9th it would be an entirely different game. As long as things with absurd killing potential like Hellfire Bolts get dealt with then the ability to operate on the table gets easier. And it's not that the opponent is making bad decisions - they're a rock and a hard place.
There's the matter of Saint Katherine, which helps produce 6s and breaks the acts of faith limit among other very decent abilities. And then there's some decent CP regen on top of not always needing CP for rerolls so tank shock and grenades can be useful - especially with Paragons being vehicles and swinging a S12 mace and engines swinging with S10.
This is also an index detachment and as such leans melee / martyr heavy in the strats and enhancements. Eventually we'll see stuff like the 'Holy Trinity' make its way back in other detachments.
What I don't like is the seemingly rough internal balance or needing lots of characters that people don't own.
I think Sisters is going to be high ceiling trying to manage / generate MD and dealing with losses.
Saying something is "high ceiling" without knowing points is basically tantamount to saying it doesn't look that great (i.e. for this stuff to be good, you're reliant on cheapness/luckiness or your opponent to make bad decisions). Why can't you just be open with that?
Because they do have good stuff and it's quite complicated. If you were to take missions out of 9th it would be an entirely different game. As long as things with absurd killing potential like Hellfire Bolts get dealt with then the ability to operate on the table gets easier. And it's not that the opponent is making bad decisions - they're a rock and a hard place.
There's the matter of Saint Katherine, which helps produce 6s and breaks the acts of faith limit among other very decent abilities. And then there's some decent CP regen on top of not always needing CP for rerolls so tank shock and grenades can be useful - especially with Paragons being vehicles and swinging a S12 mace and engines swinging with S10.
This is also an index detachment and as such leans melee / martyr heavy in the strats and enhancements. Eventually we'll see stuff like the 'Holy Trinity' make its way back in other detachments.
What I don't like is the seemingly rough internal balance or needing lots of characters that people don't own.
I dont count St Katherine as a character because even though I have her she is beyond a nightmare to transport safely so I cant actually use her.
tneva82 wrote: Ahyes. In edition where durability goes up sisters supposed to jupt delete units at will as before.
Reduced lethality great as long as apply only your opponent eh?
Id just settle for our anti-tank squad being able to wound the average tank on better than a 5+
This seems to be a trend. Tyranids only have a few weapons that do more than 3 Damage. Most of the non-heavy anti-tank guns (blasters, meltas) wound rhinos on a 5+.
Unless vehicles get a significant points increase, it feels like vehicle durability might be a problem in early 10th.
I don't miss Armor Values and the Vehicle Damage chart, but at least anti-tank guns could reliably hurt tanks under that system. Blasters only wounding rhinos on a 5+ compared to a splinter rifle's 6+ feels really weird.
So you enpectea strength to just go up same as t? Would kinda negate point with nothing changing...
tneva82 wrote: Ahyes. In edition where durability goes up sisters supposed to jupt delete units at will as before.
Reduced lethality great as long as apply only your opponent eh?
Id just settle for our anti-tank squad being able to wound the average tank on better than a 5+
This seems to be a trend. Tyranids only have a few weapons that do more than 3 Damage. Most of the non-heavy anti-tank guns (blasters, meltas) wound rhinos on a 5+.
Unless vehicles get a significant points increase, it feels like vehicle durability might be a problem in early 10th.
I don't miss Armor Values and the Vehicle Damage chart, but at least anti-tank guns could reliably hurt tanks under that system. Blasters only wounding rhinos on a 5+ compared to a splinter rifle's 6+ feels really weird.
Difference is even our heavy weapons lack str as well.
Lascannons are str 12 ffs.
Yeah, the drukhari dark lance is S12 as wel. (Although at least my drukhari will have the option to spam haywire scourges.)
It's definitely a shift in how anti-tank weapons are meant to behave. It used to be that a single meltagun shot could take out a rhino without even needing to get all that lucky. This edition, I guess meltaguns are something you need several of to reliably do any appreciable harm to a rhino. I support the idea of lowering lethality on the whole, but I'm struggling to think of a meltagun or blaster as something that only occassionally does damage when you shoot it at a rhino.
It seems like a better approach would have been to up the strength of such weapons but leave the Damage a bit lower. Or just charge more points for anti-tank guns and then up their stats to match the changes to vehicle Wounds and Toughness. (The latter assuming that GW wants dedicated AT weapons to continue being roughly as effective against tanks as before.)
So you enpectea strength to just go up same as t? Would kinda negate point with nothing changing...
Enpectea?
Upping the strength of dedicated anti-tank guns specifically would allow GW to reduce lethality throughout the game overall but still allow anti-tank guns to keep pace with vehicles. So for instance, if GW made 10th edition meltaguns S12, they'd remain consistently capable of damaging rhinos and land raiders, but bolters would still be wounding that rhino on a 6+ instead of a 5+ (as it does now).
GW seems to at least sort of want that to be the case given that they've upped the strength of lascannons and dark lances to still wound rhinos on 3s and land raiders on 4s. Not giving the same treatment to meltas and blasters is awkward because you have these single-shot weapons traditionally framed as being anti-tank guns that now only wound a rhino 1/3rd of the time (after hitting). Shooting a blaster or melta at a rhino feels like a gamble with a modest payoff instead of feeling like a specialized weapon performing reliably against its target of choice.
EDIT: Sloppy math says that to kill a T9 W10 rhino with blasters (which are framed as anti-tank guns), you need...
10+ damage means 3 wounds (AP means each wound goes straight through the rhino's save)
3 wounds means you need 9 hits.
Drukhari hit with blasters on a 3+, so you need 13.5 blasters to get those 9 hits.
So that's 3 squads of blaster scourges plus the two blasters from a 10-man warrior squad to take out a single rhino. I'm all for reduced lethality, but it doesn't seem like you should need 3 dedicated anti-tank squads plus some help from their friends to take out a single enemy transport.
tneva82 wrote: Goal wasn't to keep at same. Goal was to stop vehicles going bam instantly...
What's the point of upping durability if you up lethality to match?
Only way to get lethality down is not up lethality same rate as durability get buffed. That's game design 101.
The point is some factions got upped lethality but others didnt.
SM get str 12 lascannons and all sorts of lethal wounds or whatever it is.
Sisters got str 9 Melta.
It used to be Melta was better at killing but at the drawback of low range. Now Lascannons just make melta look bad.
Mythantor wrote: We get no ranged weapons higher than str 10 and precious few of them as MM are only str 9 which for the supposed premier tank killers is just dumb.
You cant even put dominions in a Immolator anymore. Only units you can put in them is Sacrosants or Retributers as basic Celestians are just outright gone...
Dominions locked to 10 models and Retributers locked to 5.
Oh and we're rocking guard level leadership now.
I kinda want to just cry.
I think they might be getting a third wave of models that might cover the firepower gap. As I understand it they’ve been very popular and there’s still space for a Vindicator variant or some dakka bikes. This very much feels like a placeholder.
But yeah, there’s some odd choices. Like I got 10 converted Celestians and had my squads set up for blocks of 20 which went out the window. It puts the army in a weird place. You can’t get the numbers to make up for having less wounds than marines but you also can’t lean into MSU with units of 5. So you can’t maximise your character buffs on bigger squads.
Points are going to be everything but I worry the writers are overvaluing the power armour and ignoring that a Chaos Marine has more attacks than a Canoness. They have to be aggressively costed relative to marines with the stat lines they have.
I am glad Paragons and the Triumph got a boost. Excuse to get the Triumph finally built. ?
Daedalus81 wrote: Kabalites will be a 10 man like BSS. Their one Dark Lance...
1 * .5 * .666 * .833 * 5.5 = 1.5
And the MM
2 * .5 * .333 * 3.5 = 1.2 / 1.8 ( short )
Against a Landraider it becomes 0.9 vs 1 / 1.5.
The MM might be "worse", but it has twice the shots and almost max AP still. Range is an issue, but that's likely a problem for points.
Also I take back my comment on MD for damage. It should be used on wounding if you don't have rerolls to prevent shots from cratering.
To clarify, I'm personally not really comparing lances against MMs. My concern is more that, some anti-tank weapons seem like they might no longer be good at their specialized jobs. See above about needing 14 blasters to kill a rhino. Maybe I just need to adjust my perspective, but it feels like a specialized anti-tank weapon shouldn't be fishing for 5s to wound against its intended target. Maybe blasters and meltaguns aren't meant to be thought of as anti-tank weapons in 10th? Maybe they're meant to be gravis killers instead?
I find the whole "how will I ever roll a 5+ when I have miracle dice" a bit weird too.
Miracle dice are a thing, sure. But it feels weird to need to use a miracle die to make a specialized anti-tank weapon actually perform well against a tank, right? Plus, if that is GW's intention, I think I'd rather trade the whole Miracle Dice mechanic for a couple more points of Strength on my sisters' meltas.
tneva82 wrote: Goal wasn't to keep at same. Goal was to stop vehicles going bam instantly...
What's the point of upping durability if you up lethality to match?
Only way to get lethality down is not up lethality same rate as durability get buffed. That's game design 101.
Stop with the gaslighting, everyone knows that GW already hilariously failed at their actual stated goal, which anyways was not that some armies should just get folded by tough vehicles.
And even though we're still missing points, this incompetently made Index just works if Sisters are pretty much a Horde army now.
tneva82 wrote: Goal wasn't to keep at same. Goal was to stop vehicles going bam instantly...
What's the point of upping durability if you up lethality to match?
Because the problem was never that vehicles were too vulnerable to anti-vehicle weapons. The problem was that vehicles were vulnerable to anti-elite weapons. This led to many units not bothering with dedicated anti-vehicle weapons because their anti-elite weapons were almost as good (sometimes even better), whilst also being much better against infantry and such as well.
Thus, the goal should not have been to make vehicles more durable against dedicated anti-vehicle weapons, the goal should have been to make vehicles more resilient to anti-elite weapons like plasmaguns.
I should add, too, that GW approached the problem in the most asinine way possible. The logical solution would have been to give vehicles very good saves (including 1+ saves) and cut down on invulnerable saves. This would then have combined well with overall reductions to AP of many weapons. Anti-vehicle weapons, though, could retain their AP - which would finally serve a meaningful purpose.
Instead, what we have is an absolute mess of some anti-vehicle weapons being buffed, whilst others are left behind. Not only that but their damage/rules still make them out to be anti-vehicle weapons, even though their strength makes them horribly inefficient at the task.
Not that any of this matters. GW could replace the contents of their boxes with parasitic wasps and people here would still lavish praise on them for making a bold and unforeseen improvement to their games.
Daedalus81 wrote: Kabalites will be a 10 man like BSS. Their one Dark Lance...
1 * .5 * .666 * .833 * 5.5 = 1.5
And the MM
2 * .5 * .333 * 3.5 = 1.2 / 1.8 ( short )
Against a Landraider it becomes 0.9 vs 1 / 1.5.
I'm not sure your math is proving what you seem to think it's proving. Needing 8 multi-meltas (so 2 entire Retributor units) firing at 18" to kill a single Rhino is not a good return.
Even at optimum range, you still need 6 multi-meltas to (on average) guarantee a kill.
For a weapon that's supposed to sacrifice range for effectiveness, that's an utterly abysmal return.
Tyel wrote: I find the whole "how will I ever roll a 5+ when I have miracle dice" a bit weird too.
Don't worry, SoB players, you're saved. Miracle Dice are the answer to every single problem your army faces. Because, just as DE have infinite Pain Tokens at all times, so too does your army have infinite Miracle Dice that can be spent freely on every single roll your army ever has to make.
Sheesh. People complain when units die and when they don't the omplain.
Bup it has become clear lethality going down is fine as long as its for others. Own units should laugh at enemy firepower but own units should delete enemy.
tneva82 wrote: Ah yes. Weapons should just delete units.
Sheesh. People complain when units die and when they don't the omplain.
Bup it has become clear lethality going down is fine as long as its for others. Own units should laugh at enemy firepower but own units should delete enemy.
Replace skill with op datasheets.
Not sure if you're trolling or just being salty because people agree (edit: disagree) with you. That's a really disingenuous interpretation of what people have been saying.
The issue isn't that I want my personal armies' weapons to auto-delete tanks. The issue is that I want everyone's anti-tank weapons to be reasonably effective against tanks. And needing 14 blasters to kill a rhino doesn't seem reasonable to me.
tneva82 wrote: Ah yes. Weapons should just delete units.
Sheesh. People complain when units die and when they don't the omplain.
Bup it has become clear lethality going down is fine as long as its for others. Own units should laugh at enemy firepower but own units should delete enemy.
Replace skill with op datasheets.
I will just repeat: Stop with the gaslighting, anti-vehicle weapons should obviously be able to destroy vehicles.
And i also will repeat this: Sisters are a slow + low range glass canon army, if they don't have lethality they have nothing, and they can't even remotely laugh at enemies firepower(and i'm not just talking about the broken Eldar or Space Marines here).
Normal players aren't Siegler, to expect that skill just sommehow magically resolves all the glaring balancing issues of GW is ridiculous.
Upping the strength of dedicated anti-tank guns specifically would allow GW to reduce lethality throughout the game overall but still allow anti-tank guns to keep pace with vehicles. So for instance, if GW made 10th edition meltaguns S12, they'd remain consistently capable of damaging rhinos and land raiders, but bolters would still be wounding that rhino on a 6+ instead of a 5+ (as it does now).
bolters wounding tanks on 5 wasnt the main source of lethality
Wyldhunt wrote: To clarify, I'm personally not really comparing lances against MMs. My concern is more that, some anti-tank weapons seem like they might no longer be good at their specialized jobs. See above about needing 14 blasters to kill a rhino. Maybe I just need to adjust my perspective, but it feels like a specialized anti-tank weapon shouldn't be fishing for 5s to wound against its intended target. Maybe blasters and meltaguns aren't meant to be thought of as anti-tank weapons in 10th? Maybe they're meant to be gravis killers instead?
I do think Blasters are transitioned to be a better heavy infantry / light vehicle hunter. Before the game didn't have a lot of stuff that popped up in the T5 / T6 range save for specialized armies. Now in this new scale where T6/7/8 would be uncommon there's still a ton of stuff that that's going to be crucial.
An armored sentinel is now T8 W7 2+, Ballistarii are T7 W7 3+, Kataphrons are T7 W3 3+, Custodes, etc.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
vipoid wrote: I'm not sure your math is proving what you seem to think it's proving. Needing 8 multi-meltas (so 2 entire Retributor units) firing at 18" to kill a single Rhino is not a good return.
Even at optimum range, you still need 6 multi-meltas to (on average) guarantee a kill.
For a weapon that's supposed to sacrifice range for effectiveness, that's an utterly abysmal return.
I think that's sort of the point even though your perspective is more negative than mine.
And so you might say, "Well, yea short range!", but that ignores all the platforms that are very fast -- including the ones where they shoot out of a Rhino and get +1 to hit and +1 to wound for the Rhino being on low wounds or any other buffs that might be available to this platform.
gunchar wrote: And i also will repeat this: Sisters are a slow + low range glass canon army, if they don't have lethality they have nothing, and they can't even remotely laugh at enemies firepower(and i'm not just talking about the broken Eldar or Space Marines here).
How shall we use our slow + low range glass canon army to any effect?
Two words: Rhino. Immolator.
So we need to do what we used to do before 8th/9th edition made vehicles to expensive to be as fragile as they are. As long as they don't overcost these two transports, we have a way to make things work.
gunchar wrote: And i also will repeat this: Sisters are a slow + low range glass canon army, if they don't have lethality they have nothing, and they can't even remotely laugh at enemies firepower(and i'm not just talking about the broken Eldar or Space Marines here).
How shall we use our slow + low range glass canon army to any effect?
Two words: Rhino. Immolator.
So we need to do what we used to do before 8th/9th edition made vehicles to expensive to be as fragile as they are. As long as they don't overcost these two transports, we have a way to make things work.
You're not wrong, but I do predict a modest price increase for most vehicles this edition given that they seem to be appreciably more durable. So while they might not be overcosted, I wouldn't be surprised if a rhino or immolator takes up a larger portion of your points than it used to.
Lets not forget blood of martyrs. Yes you gotta be below half strength but still would help a combat unit wound a tank easily. And you have holy rage for another 1+ to wound.
Melta kept it's ap4 so you're going to ignore the armour of most vehicles.
Could also grab a palatine for some lethal hits. Or the banner character to pass out some devastating wounds. Both of which you can combine with Miracle dice right? And there are a few ways to make a Miracle dice an auto 6.
But yes, the -6 range on a multi melta is a bit naff, but it's also global not just sisters.
cody.d. wrote: Lets not forget blood of martyrs. Yes you gotta be below half strength but still would help a combat unit wound a tank easily. And you have holy rage for another 1+ to wound.
Melta kept it's ap4 so you're going to ignore the armour of most vehicles.
Could also grab a palatine for some lethal hits. Or the banner character to pass out some devastating wounds. Both of which you can combine with Miracle dice right? And there are a few ways to make a Miracle dice an auto 6.
But yes, the -6 range on a multi melta is a bit naff, but it's also global not just sisters.
A unit below half strength is a dead unit. Even Necrons have T4 at least.
cody.d. wrote: Lets not forget blood of martyrs. Yes you gotta be below half strength but still would help a combat unit wound a tank easily. And you have holy rage for another 1+ to wound.
Melta kept it's ap4 so you're going to ignore the armour of most vehicles.
Could also grab a palatine for some lethal hits. Or the banner character to pass out some devastating wounds. Both of which you can combine with Miracle dice right? And there are a few ways to make a Miracle dice an auto 6.
But yes, the -6 range on a multi melta is a bit naff, but it's also global not just sisters.
A unit below half strength is a dead unit. Even Necrons have T4 at least.
You're right, if a unit is below half strength you should just remove it from the board.
cody.d. wrote: Lets not forget blood of martyrs. Yes you gotta be below half strength but still would help a combat unit wound a tank easily. And you have holy rage for another 1+ to wound.
Melta kept it's ap4 so you're going to ignore the armour of most vehicles.
Could also grab a palatine for some lethal hits. Or the banner character to pass out some devastating wounds. Both of which you can combine with Miracle dice right? And there are a few ways to make a Miracle dice an auto 6.
But yes, the -6 range on a multi melta is a bit naff, but it's also global not just sisters.
A unit below half strength is a dead unit. Even Necrons have T4 at least.
I mean, given that the last model removed should be a Melta/Multimelta model, opposing forces would have to be very careful to either not drop below half-strength a unit or, if it is below, kill it now.
Five T3 W1 3+ models take...
33 BS 3+ AP0 (or AP-1 but cover) Bolters (Heavy Bolters too, if cover)
60 BS 4+ Lasguns (no Lethal Hits)
20ish BS 3+ Assault Cannon shots
That's not insignificant firepower. It's not a TON, but leaving a singular Multimelta online with +1 to-wound gives, at worst, just shy of 40% odds of wounding a T14 model once, and a just shy of 5% chance of wounding it twice.
vipoid wrote: I should add, too, that GW approached the problem in the most asinine way possible. The logical solution would have been to give vehicles very good saves (including 1+ saves) and cut down on invulnerable saves. This would then have combined well with overall reductions to AP of many weapons. Anti-vehicle weapons, though, could retain their AP - which would finally serve a meaningful purpose.
Wait, this wouldn't have helped at all? One of the biggest offenders for anti-everything was plasma, which has high AP so it can kill terminators. Do you think an ork truck should have better armor than a terminator?
So you enpectea strength to just go up same as t? Would kinda negate point with nothing changing...
I expect SOME of the Strength to go up, like SOME of the toughness went up. Monsters and Vehicles got tougher. The Strength of weapons for Monsters and Vehicles should have also gone up. The point of this change was to make the anti-"elite" weapons less functional vs the "tanks" so that the tanks had more chance, and the choice between a Grav Gun and a Lascannon was more meaningful. Oops.
So you enpectea strength to just go up same as t? Would kinda negate point with nothing changing...
I expect SOME of the Strength to go up, like SOME of the toughness went up. Monsters and Vehicles got tougher. The Strength of weapons for Monsters and Vehicles should have also gone up. The point of this change was to make the anti-"elite" weapons less functional vs the "tanks" so that the tanks had more chance, and the choice between a Grav Gun and a Lascannon was more meaningful. Oops.
GW's solution works; plasma is no good against tanks, lascannons are, and big bricks like the monolith are only easily wounded by the most apocalyptic weapons available. The only issue here is that melta got left behind for no obvious reason.
So you enpectea strength to just go up same as t? Would kinda negate point with nothing changing...
I expect SOME of the Strength to go up, like SOME of the toughness went up. Monsters and Vehicles got tougher. The Strength of weapons for Monsters and Vehicles should have also gone up. The point of this change was to make the anti-"elite" weapons less functional vs the "tanks" so that the tanks had more chance, and the choice between a Grav Gun and a Lascannon was more meaningful. Oops.
*Points to weapons where the strength did go up.*
Lascannons, and one-offs with a Las Vegas Statline. Not really on the Melta or Kraks. Besides, Anti-Vehicle 2+ on the Gravs make the whole exercise pretty much redundant anyway. Remember the Guilliman Parking Lot? Anyone else see the Guilliman Crosswalk with Bobby G and a bunch of Grav Cannon Devastators?
Breton wrote: Lascannons, and one-offs with a Las Vegas Statline. Not really on the Melta or Kraks. Besides, Anti-Vehicle 2+ on the Gravs make the whole exercise pretty much redundant anyway. Remember the Guilliman Parking Lot? Anyone else see the Guilliman Crosswalk with Bobby G and a bunch of Grav Cannon Devastators?
Melta still messes up tanks pretty well especially when paired with things like miracle dice, reroll wounds, etc. It's just not as good as it used to be which is what a durability increase means.
Durabilty for sisters has also gone up, a character gives 4++, medics give FNP and you can tank wounds on a character and heal 3 back a turn. And each character can be rezed with a stratagem.
A unit of retrubutors hopping out of an immolator also feel like they'd do a number on many tanks.
Also, I'm assuming melta went up to 9 so you don't have to wound the big T16 stuff like stompas on 6s.
H.B.M.C. wrote: So in other words, they don't mess up tanks particularly well unless you layer additional rules onto them.
It's like you came into this thread only having read half the posts.
If you're worried about tanks why wouldn't you build a good tank-hunting unit and use your faction rules and rerolls to support that unit? That's how modern 40k works, you layer rules on specialist units to overcome problems.
Melta still messes up tanks pretty well especially when paired with things like miracle dice, reroll wounds, etc. It's just not as good as it used to be which is what a durability increase means.
Not really - They get 4 Multi-Meltas per squad, Range 18 - 9 for MELTA - so no ablative wounds, and only reroll 1 on the wounds roll for less than a 40% success rate. Give them 9 shots including the Superior's Inferno pistol 6 hit, 2 wound for about 11 damage on average. That means half the time they also do worse than that. Even if they're cheap, they're still rule-of-three. As near as I can tell looking at the sheets the best source of Anti-tank for Sisters is allying in Armigers. They don't have lascannon, they don't have grav. And they had to give up their Heavy Bolters to get the Meltas.
5 Man DevSquad with Grav: 12 Strength Who-Cares -1/-2 Range 24" D3 shots + a grav pistol hitting on rerollable 2's or 3's, rerolling all wounds but only caring about the 1's that can go in a Drop Pod
5 Woman Retributors: 8 S9 -4 D6+2 9" range shots plus a Melta Pistol that reroll a 1 to wound and that may or may not have enough miracle dice to help and can go in a Rhino.
First Turn: Drop Pod Assault, Devastator Doctrine,
11 hits, 10 wounders, 3+ - 2 = 6ish unsaved, 18 Damage.
First Turn: Rhino Rush
6 hits, 2ish wounders, 3+ -4 2ish unsaved 11 Damage. with one Miracle dice in there somewhere probably on the wound roll
Grav deletes a Repulsor or less - but probably not quite a Land Raider.
Melta doesn't QUITE delete a Gladiator, Vindicator (2+ save) but probably does delete the Predator.
That's a pretty big differential. It gets worse when you see the Tac Squads potentially carrying a Lascannon for polishing off things that didn't quite die due to averages or not-quite-deleted, but the Battle Sisters Squad can't take the Lascannon, and would likely be hysterically out range for Multi-Melta Support.
Sisters are just in a bad spot. Most of it is changing the weapon roles leaving them without a weapon for the role. Some of it is they need a range expansion. Their faction/Det abilities being late-game not Alphastrike focused just piles onto an already bad situation for them.
So a unit of retributors in a immolator rockup to a landraider. You can even fit a cannoness in there if you want to make sure it dies. Unless my maths is bad you should be pretty close to one shotting it on average.
Also, can you use multiple miricale dice in a single shooting attack now?
Melta still messes up tanks pretty well especially when paired with things like miracle dice, reroll wounds, etc. It's just not as good as it used to be which is what a durability increase means.
Not really - They get 4 Multi-Meltas per squad, Range 18 - 9 for MELTA - so no ablative wounds, and only reroll 1 on the wounds roll for less than a 40% success rate. Give them 9 shots including the Superior's Inferno pistol 6 hit, 2 wound for about 11 damage on average. That means half the time they also do worse than that. Even if they're cheap, they're still rule-of-three. As near as I can tell looking at the sheets the best source of Anti-tank for Sisters is allying in Armigers. They don't have lascannon, they don't have grav. And they had to give up their Heavy Bolters to get the Meltas.
5 Man DevSquad with Grav: 12 Strength Who-Cares -1/-2 Range 24" D3 shots + a grav pistol hitting on rerollable 2's or 3's, rerolling all wounds but only caring about the 1's that can go in a Drop Pod
5 Woman Retributors: 8 S9 -4 D6+2 9" range shots plus a Melta Pistol that reroll a 1 to wound and that may or may not have enough miracle dice to help and can go in a Rhino.
First Turn: Drop Pod Assault, Devastator Doctrine,
11 hits, 10 wounders, 3+ - 2 = 6ish unsaved, 18 Damage.
First Turn: Rhino Rush
6 hits, 2ish wounders, 3+ -4 2ish unsaved 11 Damage. with one Miracle dice in there somewhere probably on the wound roll
Grav deletes a Repulsor or less - but probably not quite a Land Raider.
Melta doesn't QUITE delete a Gladiator, Vindicator (2+ save) but probably does delete the Predator.
That's a pretty big differential. It gets worse when you see the Tac Squads potentially carrying a Lascannon for polishing off things that didn't quite die due to averages or not-quite-deleted, but the Battle Sisters Squad can't take the Lascannon, and would likely be hysterically out range for Multi-Melta Support.
Sisters are just in a bad spot. Most of it is changing the weapon roles leaving them without a weapon for the role. Some of it is they need a range expansion. Their faction/Det abilities being late-game not Alphastrike focused just piles onto an already bad situation for them.
I should also add I think an equal half of the problem is giving Grav Anti-Vehicle 2+
I think Melta should have been given Anti-Vehicle (probably 3+ or 4+ but not 2+) and MAYBE (pending a deep dive on Primarchs, Nids, and Daemons) Anti-Monster 4+. If they have their heart set on giving Grav Anti-Vehicle it should probably top out at 5+ to still tag the T11+ vehicles, but even that I'm pretty meh on.
Canadian 5th wrote: If you're worried about tanks why wouldn't you build a good tank-hunting unit and use your faction rules and rerolls to support that unit? That's how modern 40k works, you layer rules on specialist units to overcome problems.
I admit there are two threads with similar conversations going on, so I'm sorry you haven't seen everything said on the topic so far. That's on me.
As to your point about building a good AT unit, well, that's the issue that's being discussed. To copy over what I said in the other thread:
I wrote:
Rihgu wrote: Melta weapons are just anti-elite now, rather than anti-vehicle.
New edition, new role. Like how grav guns went from anti-elite to anti-vehicle for some reason.
And that's fine.
Sure, it doesn't make sense that after 10 editions they've decided to change the role of one of the most prolific and storied anti-tank weapons in the game, but whatever - let's go with it! - and we'll say that the change to the meltagun is entirely intentional and it is meant to be an anti-elite weapon. I think it steps on the toes of what Plasma weapons are meant to do, but as I said, let's go with it and accept this as inentional. Fine.
Alongside this, your other anti-tank weapons (like the equally as prolific and common Lascannon) change to keep up with the changes in toughness values, and, if anything, further define the difference between an anti-tank and an anti-elite weapon. Also fine.
But Sisters don't have any other anti-tank weapons to increase and keep pace. Melta weaponry was their thing, and now they've been left behind. Do you see the issue?
If you choose to change the role of a near-universal weapon type for every army, then you have be aware that it might create some serious gaps. Other armies have Lascannons and Krak Missiles and other things that have changed, so the loss of melta-weaponry as a premiere tank killer isn't really that bitter a pill to swallow. For Sisters the buck stopped with Multi-Meltas.
Melta still messes up tanks pretty well especially when paired with things like miracle dice, reroll wounds, etc. It's just not as good as it used to be which is what a durability increase means.
Not really - They get 4 Multi-Meltas per squad, Range 18 - 9 for MELTA - so no ablative wounds, and only reroll 1 on the wounds roll for less than a 40% success rate. Give them 9 shots including the Superior's Inferno pistol 6 hit, 2 wound for about 11 damage on average. That means half the time they also do worse than that. Even if they're cheap, they're still rule-of-three. As near as I can tell looking at the sheets the best source of Anti-tank for Sisters is allying in Armigers. They don't have lascannon, they don't have grav. And they had to give up their Heavy Bolters to get the Meltas.
5 Man DevSquad with Grav: 12 Strength Who-Cares -1/-2 Range 24" D3 shots + a grav pistol hitting on rerollable 2's or 3's, rerolling all wounds but only caring about the 1's that can go in a Drop Pod
5 Woman Retributors: 8 S9 -4 D6+2 9" range shots plus a Melta Pistol that reroll a 1 to wound and that may or may not have enough miracle dice to help and can go in a Rhino.
First Turn: Drop Pod Assault, Devastator Doctrine,
11 hits, 10 wounders, 3+ - 2 = 6ish unsaved, 18 Damage.
First Turn: Rhino Rush
6 hits, 2ish wounders, 3+ -4 2ish unsaved 11 Damage. with one Miracle dice in there somewhere probably on the wound roll
Grav deletes a Repulsor or less - but probably not quite a Land Raider.
Melta doesn't QUITE delete a Gladiator, Vindicator (2+ save) but probably does delete the Predator.
That's a pretty big differential. It gets worse when you see the Tac Squads potentially carrying a Lascannon for polishing off things that didn't quite die due to averages or not-quite-deleted, but the Battle Sisters Squad can't take the Lascannon, and would likely be hysterically out range for Multi-Melta Support.
Sisters are just in a bad spot. Most of it is changing the weapon roles leaving them without a weapon for the role. Some of it is they need a range expansion. Their faction/Det abilities being late-game not Alphastrike focused just piles onto an already bad situation for them.
You might correct me if I've missed something but looking at just the two datasheets those numbers don't appear to be correct. Disembarking from either a drop pod or rhino that moved means both units are hitting on 4's.
Grav-cannons are only -1 AP so four of them works out to 12 shots, 6 hits, 5 wounds, 2.5 save (vs 3+) and 7.5 damage (excluding the Cherub or 9 damage using it).
Multi-Meltas work out to 8 shots, 4 hits, 1.76 hits (factoring in Retributors re-roll 1,s), zero saves (vs 3+) and 6.18 damage outside melta range (9.7 damage inside melta range).
EDIT - maybe disembarking from a drop pod doesn't count as moving? Seems unclear to me a quick look at the core rules. That would swing things to the Grav-Cannons a fair bit, brining them up to 10 damange average without the Cherub.
Grav-cannons are only -1 AP so four of them works out to 12 shots, 6 hits, 5 wounds, 2.5 save (vs 3+) and 7.5 damage (excluding the Cherub or 9 damage using it).
Multi-Meltas work out to 8 shots, 4 hits, 1.76 hits (factoring in Retributors re-roll 1,s), zero saves (vs 3+) and 6.18 damage outside melta range (9.7 damage inside melta range).
EDIT - maybe disembarking from a drop pod doesn't count as moving? Seems unclear to me a quick look at the core rules. That would swing things to the Grav-Cannons a fair bit, brining them up to 10 damange average without the Cherub.
You're right, I forgot the Disembarking/Heavy conflict - but the Devastators with Devastator Doctrine on the First Turn Drop Pod Alpha Strike still get more damage with -2 and OOM rerolls. 12 shots 9 hits. 8.Most-of-9 wounds, only 3 saves, 6*3 = ~18 damage - my initial unsaved to damage math worked out about the same based on how I was rounding 1/3 of 10, reroll 1's. Anti-Vehicle 2+ is just too big of a swing between them vs T10 where most of the tanks live.
Grav-cannons are only -1 AP so four of them works out to 12 shots, 6 hits, 5 wounds, 2.5 save (vs 3+) and 7.5 damage (excluding the Cherub or 9 damage using it).
Multi-Meltas work out to 8 shots, 4 hits, 1.76 hits (factoring in Retributors re-roll 1,s), zero saves (vs 3+) and 6.18 damage outside melta range (9.7 damage inside melta range).
EDIT - maybe disembarking from a drop pod doesn't count as moving? Seems unclear to me a quick look at the core rules. That would swing things to the Grav-Cannons a fair bit, brining them up to 10 damange average without the Cherub.
You're right, I forgot the Disembarking/Heavy conflict - but the Devastators with Devastator Doctrine on the First Turn Drop Pod Alpha Strike still get more damage with -2 and OOM rerolls. 12 shots 9 hits. 8.Most-of-9 wounds, only 3 saves, 6*3 = ~18 damage - my initial unsaved to damage math worked out about the same based on how I was rounding 1/3 of 10, reroll 1's. Anti-Vehicle 2+ is just too big of a swing between them vs T10 where most of the tanks live.
Devastator Doctrine doesn't give -1AP though does it? That was 9th?
H.B.M.C. wrote: Sure, it doesn't make sense that after 10 editions they've decided to change the role of one of the most prolific and storied anti-tank weapons in the game, but whatever - let's go with it! - and we'll say that the change to the meltagun is entirely intentional and it is meant to be an anti-elite weapon. I think it steps on the toes of what Plasma weapons are meant to do, but as I said, let's go with it and accept this as inentional. Fine.
Alongside this, your other anti-tank weapons (like the equally as prolific and common Lascannon) change to keep up with the changes in toughness values, and, if anything, further define the difference between an anti-tank and an anti-elite weapon. Also fine.
But Sisters don't have any other anti-tank weapons to increase and keep pace. Melta weaponry was their thing, and now they've been left behind. Do you see the issue?
If you choose to change the role of a near-universal weapon type for every army, then you have be aware that it might create some serious gaps. Other armies have Lascannons and Krak Missiles and other things that have changed, so the loss of melta-weaponry as a premiere tank killer isn't really that bitter a pill to swallow. For Sisters the buck stopped with Multi-Meltas.
I've seen your posts in other threads. I just don't agree with it and expect that Sisters will end up as a middle-tier army with just what we see in their index.
You have good combinations for dealing with vehicles:
Palatine + Dominions w/ 4x Melta Guns and 1x Inferno Pistol
Paragon Warsuits in Melee (Use Holy Rage as Required)
Retributors + Immolator
Grav-cannons are only -1 AP so four of them works out to 12 shots, 6 hits, 5 wounds, 2.5 save (vs 3+) and 7.5 damage (excluding the Cherub or 9 damage using it).
Multi-Meltas work out to 8 shots, 4 hits, 1.76 hits (factoring in Retributors re-roll 1,s), zero saves (vs 3+) and 6.18 damage outside melta range (9.7 damage inside melta range).
EDIT - maybe disembarking from a drop pod doesn't count as moving? Seems unclear to me a quick look at the core rules. That would swing things to the Grav-Cannons a fair bit, brining them up to 10 damange average without the Cherub.
You're right, I forgot the Disembarking/Heavy conflict - but the Devastators with Devastator Doctrine on the First Turn Drop Pod Alpha Strike still get more damage with -2 and OOM rerolls. 12 shots 9 hits. 8.Most-of-9 wounds, only 3 saves, 6*3 = ~18 damage - my initial unsaved to damage math worked out about the same based on how I was rounding 1/3 of 10, reroll 1's. Anti-Vehicle 2+ is just too big of a swing between them vs T10 where most of the tanks live.
Devastator Doctrine doesn't give -1AP though does it? That was 9th?
OOM certainly makes a big difference though.
Whoops, Dev + Storm of Fire. I did too much of that in my head, sorry. The point of Dev Doctrine was to get the extra -1 for Storm of Fire.
Turn 1 Alpha Strike, you're already likely doing Dev Doctrine from your Detachment ability for everyone to get advance and shoot - plus Hal is going to open the Pod Bay Doors - you have between 1 and 3 (or potentially but unlikely more) CP to spend - the Run and Gun guys should have a Captain for the freebie Strats which can duplicate Storm of Fire if necessary, but First things First, OOM the Biggest Baddest Tank you're worried about, If you have Bobby G, essentially but not quite OOM a secondary target) land the pod(s), Run everyone else you want to, Storm of Fire the Devs, Alpha the biggest baddest tank you're worried about, If you have G, Alpha the second biggest baddest thing you're worried about. Shoot the rest of your Free Repeat Strat Shots at priority or opportunity targets as available. Anyone think that isn't going to be a fairly standard first SM turn? For the life if me I can't find the datasheet for the new Lieutenant. I'm pretty sure I've seen it but I can't remember where. I think he couldn't lead, was always a lone operative and had an Aura, but I can't remember where I saw that IF I saw that.
Edit: Found it - they changed his name from Phobos Lieutenant to Lieutenant with Combi-weapon and he's nowhere near all the other LT's - He is Lone Operative, Infiltrate and Stealth - he has a designate an objective to reroll 1's to wound. So its not a second Storm of Fire, but it does help if you can't double OOM.
And so you might say, "Well, yea short range!", but that ignores all the platforms that are very fast -- including the ones where they shoot out of a Rhino and get +1 to hit and +1 to wound for the Rhino being on low wounds or any other buffs that might be available to this platform.
Imagining a proper Melta just makes me think even more that the incompetent comedian who wrote the gakky actual 10th Edition Melta should get fired asap.
But hey, luckily GW just saved us from the broken combo of 2 anti-tank weapons firing out of a Rhino actually doing some decent dmg to a vehicle, that would've been certainly sooo much worse than the crazy MW spam combos of multiple other armies...
Yeah great, we need an Immolator now just for Retributors to actually do their job, and what exactly do you even expect a firing deck 2 Rhino to do?
alextroy wrote: So we need to do what we used to do before 8th/9th edition
Hoping for plastic Sisters + an actual Codex or playing Celestine combos in Imperium mix armies?
cody.d. wrote: Lets not forget blood of martyrs. Yes you gotta be below half strength but still would help a combat unit wound a tank easily. And you have holy rage for another 1+ to wound.
What you are forgeting is: Sisters are a slow + low range glass(meaning fragile) canon army.
You have good combinations for dealing with vehicles:
Palatine + Dominions w/ 4x Melta Guns and 1x Inferno Pistol
Paragon Warsuits in Melee (Use Holy Rage as Required)
Retributors + Immolator
Ah yes hoping that an Ultra fragile squad of Dominions that lack range will make it to the target, a giant point sink to end up with 1 Warsuit doing some decent and Morven Vahl doing at best okayish dmg to anything that's actually tough, and 1 combo that actually works but is literally just tank-hunters needing a specific vehicle with weird ability shenanigans to simply do their job...
Yeah great, we need an Immolator now just for Retributors to actually do their job, and what exactly do you even expect a firing deck 2 Rhino to do?
alextroy wrote: So we need to do what we used to do before 8th/9th edition
Hoping for plastic Sisters + an actual Codex or playing Celestine combos in Imperium mix armies?
cody.d. wrote: Lets not forget blood of martyrs. Yes you gotta be below half strength but still would help a combat unit wound a tank easily. And you have holy rage for another 1+ to wound.
What you are forgeting is: Sisters are a slow + low range glass(meaning fragile) canon army
The point of Rhinos and Immolators is to give movement and durability to your slow + low range glass(meaning fragile) canon army. They get you to where you need to be and soak the damage until you decide to disembark. Firing Deck on the Rhino is gravy.
Retributors go in Rhinos.
Dominions go in Immolators.
A wounded Rhino gives them a +1 to hit. A gravely wounded Rhino will give +1 to wound. It also lets two of them fire out and it never slows down. If they kill it and you lose a model and can duck behind cover then you're free to move without penalty next turn. If they don't kill it then they're facing some reliable damage.
Against 3+ a Retributor unit with a +1 to hit goes to 8.3 / 13 ( from 6.2 / 9.8 ) -- cut in half when in a rhino. // Don't forget their native RR1s to wound
And with +1 to wound as well they go to -- 10.9 / 17.1.
A Grav Dev squad does 7.5 at BS4 and 10 at BS3. And Retributors are 6.2 / 9.8 BS4 and 8.3 / 13 BS3. If Grav Devs are good....so are Retributors.
Retributors go in Rhinos.
Dominions go in Immolators.
A wounded Rhino gives them a +1 to hit. A gravely wounded Rhino will give +1 to wound. It also lets two of them fire out and it never slows down. If they kill it and you lose a model and can duck behind cover then you're free to move without penalty next turn. If they don't kill it then they're facing some reliable damage.
Against 3+ a Retributor unit with a +1 to hit goes to 8.3 / 13 ( from 6.2 / 9.8 ) -- cut in half when in a rhino. // Don't forget their native RR1s to wound
And with +1 to wound as well they go to -- 10.9 / 17.1.
A Grav Dev squad does 7.5 at BS4 and 10 at BS3. And Retributors are 6.2 / 9.8 BS4 and 8.3 / 13 BS3. If Grav Devs are good....so are Retributors.
Daedalus81 wrote: A wounded Rhino gives them a +1 to hit. A gravely wounded Rhino will give +1 to wound.
Looking at the legit AT profiles available, having just a wounded or gravely wounded Rhino is a bigger challenge than one-shotting a Land Raider with 4 unbuffed MMs.
Grav-cannons are only -1 AP so four of them works out to 12 shots, 6 hits, 5 wounds, 2.5 save (vs 3+) and 7.5 damage (excluding the Cherub or 9 damage using it).
Multi-Meltas work out to 8 shots, 4 hits, 1.76 hits (factoring in Retributors re-roll 1,s), zero saves (vs 3+) and 6.18 damage outside melta range (9.7 damage inside melta range).
EDIT - maybe disembarking from a drop pod doesn't count as moving? Seems unclear to me a quick look at the core rules. That would swing things to the Grav-Cannons a fair bit, brining them up to 10 damange average without the Cherub.
You're right, I forgot the Disembarking/Heavy conflict - but the Devastators with Devastator Doctrine on the First Turn Drop Pod Alpha Strike still get more damage with -2 and OOM rerolls. 12 shots 9 hits. 8.Most-of-9 wounds, only 3 saves, 6*3 = ~18 damage - my initial unsaved to damage math worked out about the same based on how I was rounding 1/3 of 10, reroll 1's. Anti-Vehicle 2+ is just too big of a swing between them vs T10 where most of the tanks live.
Devastator Doctrine doesn't give -1AP though does it? That was 9th?
OOM certainly makes a big difference though.
Whoops, Dev + Storm of Fire. I did too much of that in my head, sorry. The point of Dev Doctrine was to get the extra -1 for Storm of Fire.
Turn 1 Alpha Strike, you're already likely doing Dev Doctrine from your Detachment ability for everyone to get advance and shoot - plus Hal is going to open the Pod Bay Doors - you have between 1 and 3 (or potentially but unlikely more) CP to spend - the Run and Gun guys should have a Captain for the freebie Strats which can duplicate Storm of Fire if necessary, but First things First, OOM the Biggest Baddest Tank you're worried about, If you have Bobby G, essentially but not quite OOM a secondary target) land the pod(s), Run everyone else you want to, Storm of Fire the Devs, Alpha the biggest baddest tank you're worried about, If you have G, Alpha the second biggest baddest thing you're worried about. Shoot the rest of your Free Repeat Strat Shots at priority or opportunity targets as available. Anyone think that isn't going to be a fairly standard first SM turn? For the life if me I can't find the datasheet for the new Lieutenant. I'm pretty sure I've seen it but I can't remember where. I think he couldn't lead, was always a lone operative and had an Aura, but I can't remember where I saw that IF I saw that.
Edit: Found it - they changed his name from Phobos Lieutenant to Lieutenant with Combi-weapon and he's nowhere near all the other LT's - He is Lone Operative, Infiltrate and Stealth - he has a designate an objective to reroll 1's to wound. So its not a second Storm of Fire, but it does help if you can't double OOM.
Ok, I've seen a lot of confused math and assumptions being thrown around. Lets approach this with a more structured analysis:
Let's assume 2 targets: Medium vehicle T9 3+ and heavy vehicle T11 2+
The marines use a CP which the sisters have no use for in this scenario, so I will balance it with 3 extra damage which is the average of a CP using the grenade strat as a reference (which the retributors could actually use in the short range scenario). I will not consider the inferno pistol in this scenario.
OotM will not be used because only 5 targets per game have that bonus, so it cannot be considered. To compensate for this, no miracle dices will be used, even if retributors actually come with 2 free miracles.
On medium vehicle the 12 grav attacks inflict: 12*1/2*5/6*2/3*3= 10 using a CP On a medium vehicle the 4 multimelta at long range inflict: 8*1/2*1/2*7/6*3.5 = 8,16 which becomes 11,16 using a CP On a medium vehicle the 4 multimelta at long range inflict: 8*1/2*1/2*7/6*5.5 = 12,83 which becomes 15,83 using a CP
The result here is quite clear. They multimeltas are more poweful at max range and impossibly more good at short range.
On a heavy vehicle the 12 grav attacks inflict: 12*1/2*5/6*1/2*3= 7,5 using a CP On a heavy vehicle the 4 multimelta at long range inflict: 8*1/2*1/3*7/6*5/6*3.5 = 4,5 which becomes 7,5 using a CP On a heavy vehicle the 4 multimelta at long range inflict: 8*1/2*1/3*7/6*5/6*5.5 = 7 which becomes 10 using a CP
The multimeltas have the same damage at long range and significantly more at short range.
Notes to this analysis:
1) I know that many will say "You can't assume 3 damage for a CP". Well, you do. People have to get used to the fact that in 10th CPs are very important resources. You can't compare 2 outputs if one uses a CP and the other one doesn't. 2CPs are a full unit back on the field in 10th. Let that sink in.
3 damage offset is actually very generous to SM in this analysis. You can repeat the math without the SM using the CP and without the sisters adding 3 damage. The results are the same on both targets.
2) This analysis is against vehicles, but against monsters the results would utterly dumpster the SM player. Out of the 2 I know which weapon I would select as an anti heavy target role, even solely for this reason.
Conclusion: Multimeltas are better anti tank than gravs.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Daedalus81 wrote: Very true. I would hope the cost of a MM goes down a bit.
They are most likely free and embedded in the unit cost. Same for devs. You can see that they have been trying to make all weapon choices equivalent in value.
AtoMaki wrote: Looking at the legit AT profiles available, having just a wounded or gravely wounded Rhino is a bigger challenge than one-shotting a Land Raider with 4 unbuffed MMs.
Not really a goal, but a consequence of failing to succeed. The whole Sisters thing is a damned if you do, damned if you don't. Kill the rhino and give them a MD and ( if they're in a good position ) let the Retributors slip away into cover with a 60% chance for them to lose a model, which will make them more effective. Or let it live and have only two MM dropping shots from the Rhino.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Spoletta wrote: They are most likely free and embedded in the unit cost. Same for devs. You can see that they have been trying to make all weapon choices equivalent in value.
I'm somewhat terrified of free upgrades, because it could easily go south on some of these units.
alextroy wrote: The point of Rhinos and Immolators is to give movement and durability to your slow + low range glass(meaning fragile) canon army. They get you to where you need to be and soak the damage until you decide to disembark. Firing Deck on the Rhino is gravy.
How is the Immolator going to help with The Blood of Martyrs? And in general, even if Sisters vehicles will be actually dirt cheap enough(which goes a bit into the becoming a Horde army direction i've mentioned in my first post in this thread) to be the solution for multiple glaring issues of the army, that together with the several pretty much mandatory characters still runs into the danger of getting mega-punished by certain secondaries.
I meant to include the summary from goonhammmer reviewing them, which is rarely that far off the mark:
General Unit Thoughts
With the boosts to Miracle Dice generation, some crazy combos, and just really good units, this army looks primed to actually do some damage in 10th edition. One of the problems I forsee is trying to figure out what Leaders to attach to what units, there is so many options that it can be a little daunting. I will say though, that is a good problem to have, that means this army has a bunch of good options.
Wrap Up
That’s it for the Sisters – overall, we’re pretty happy with where they are in 10th, with some straightforwardly good and useful abilities plus a range of helpful tricks which add a little more.
I'm getting 2 distinct vibes. 1 group is, okay, you can do this, this and this, there are options. And the other is fingers plugging their ears, saying lalala i can't hear you everything is terrible.
cody.d. wrote: I'm getting 2 distinct vibes. 1 group is, okay, you can do this, this and this, there are options. And the other is fingers plugging their ears, saying lalala i can't hear you everything is terrible.
I'm also getting two distinct vibes:
One group mostly consisting of non-Sisters players says, everything is fine because you can jump through several hoops to do basic gak, here just look at how this Goonhammer article hypes up hot air, etc...
And the other group are most of the Sisters players(at least the ones who actually like to play competetively here and there).....
Grav-cannons are only -1 AP so four of them works out to 12 shots, 6 hits, 5 wounds, 2.5 save (vs 3+) and 7.5 damage (excluding the Cherub or 9 damage using it).
Multi-Meltas work out to 8 shots, 4 hits, 1.76 hits (factoring in Retributors re-roll 1,s), zero saves (vs 3+) and 6.18 damage outside melta range (9.7 damage inside melta range).
EDIT - maybe disembarking from a drop pod doesn't count as moving? Seems unclear to me a quick look at the core rules. That would swing things to the Grav-Cannons a fair bit, brining them up to 10 damange average without the Cherub.
You're right, I forgot the Disembarking/Heavy conflict - but the Devastators with Devastator Doctrine on the First Turn Drop Pod Alpha Strike still get more damage with -2 and OOM rerolls. 12 shots 9 hits. 8.Most-of-9 wounds, only 3 saves, 6*3 = ~18 damage - my initial unsaved to damage math worked out about the same based on how I was rounding 1/3 of 10, reroll 1's. Anti-Vehicle 2+ is just too big of a swing between them vs T10 where most of the tanks live.
Devastator Doctrine doesn't give -1AP though does it? That was 9th?
OOM certainly makes a big difference though.
Whoops, Dev + Storm of Fire. I did too much of that in my head, sorry. The point of Dev Doctrine was to get the extra -1 for Storm of Fire.
Turn 1 Alpha Strike, you're already likely doing Dev Doctrine from your Detachment ability for everyone to get advance and shoot - plus Hal is going to open the Pod Bay Doors - you have between 1 and 3 (or potentially but unlikely more) CP to spend - the Run and Gun guys should have a Captain for the freebie Strats which can duplicate Storm of Fire if necessary, but First things First, OOM the Biggest Baddest Tank you're worried about, If you have Bobby G, essentially but not quite OOM a secondary target) land the pod(s), Run everyone else you want to, Storm of Fire the Devs, Alpha the biggest baddest tank you're worried about, If you have G, Alpha the second biggest baddest thing you're worried about. Shoot the rest of your Free Repeat Strat Shots at priority or opportunity targets as available. Anyone think that isn't going to be a fairly standard first SM turn? For the life if me I can't find the datasheet for the new Lieutenant. I'm pretty sure I've seen it but I can't remember where. I think he couldn't lead, was always a lone operative and had an Aura, but I can't remember where I saw that IF I saw that.
Edit: Found it - they changed his name from Phobos Lieutenant to Lieutenant with Combi-weapon and he's nowhere near all the other LT's - He is Lone Operative, Infiltrate and Stealth - he has a designate an objective to reroll 1's to wound. So its not a second Storm of Fire, but it does help if you can't double OOM.
Ok, I've seen a lot of confused math and assumptions being thrown around. Lets approach this with a more structured analysis:
Let's assume 2 targets: Medium vehicle T9 3+ and heavy vehicle T11 2+
The marines use a CP which the sisters have no use for in this scenario, so I will balance it with 3 extra damage which is the average of a CP using the grenade strat as a reference (which the retributors could actually use in the short range scenario). I will not consider the inferno pistol in this scenario.
OotM will not be used because only 5 targets per game have that bonus, so it cannot be considered. To compensate for this, no miracle dices will be used, even if retributors actually come with 2 free miracles.
On medium vehicle the 12 grav attacks inflict: 12*1/2*5/6*2/3*3= 10 using a CP On a medium vehicle the 4 multimelta at long range inflict: 8*1/2*1/2*7/6*3.5 = 8,16 which becomes 11,16 using a CP On a medium vehicle the 4 multimelta at long range inflict: 8*1/2*1/2*7/6*5.5 = 12,83 which becomes 15,83 using a CP
The result here is quite clear. They multimeltas are more poweful at max range and impossibly more good at short range.
On a heavy vehicle the 12 grav attacks inflict: 12*1/2*5/6*1/2*3= 7,5 using a CP On a heavy vehicle the 4 multimelta at long range inflict: 8*1/2*1/3*7/6*5/6*3.5 = 4,5 which becomes 7,5 using a CP On a heavy vehicle the 4 multimelta at long range inflict: 8*1/2*1/3*7/6*5/6*5.5 = 7 which becomes 10 using a CP
The multimeltas have the same damage at long range and significantly more at short range.
Notes to this analysis:
1) I know that many will say "You can't assume 3 damage for a CP". Well, you do. People have to get used to the fact that in 10th CPs are very important resources. You can't compare 2 outputs if one uses a CP and the other one doesn't. 2CPs are a full unit back on the field in 10th. Let that sink in.
3 damage offset is actually very generous to SM in this analysis. You can repeat the math without the SM using the CP and without the sisters adding 3 damage. The results are the same on both targets.
2) This analysis is against vehicles, but against monsters the results would utterly dumpster the SM player. Out of the 2 I know which weapon I would select as an anti heavy target role, even solely for this reason.
Conclusion: Multimeltas are better anti tank than gravs.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Daedalus81 wrote: Very true. I would hope the cost of a MM goes down a bit.
They are most likely free and embedded in the unit cost. Same for devs. You can see that they have been trying to make all weapon choices equivalent in value.
I have to wonder what good AT looks like in 10th Edition 40K. For example, the Exorcist Missile Launcher is pretty descent light/medium AT when not targeting 2+ Save targets in my opinion:
T 6-9, Sv 3+: Average Damage 5.7 (7.13 when Stationary)
T 10, Sv 3+: Average Damage 4.28 (5.35 when Stationary)
T 11-19, Sv 2+: Average Damage 2.14 (2.67 when Stationary)
Compare that to a 4 Lascannon Devestator Squad:
T 7-11, Sv 3+: Average Damage 5.00 (6.67 when Stationary)
T 7-11, Sv 2+: Average Damage 4.00 (5.33 when Stationary)
T 12, Sv 3+: Average Damage 3.75 (5.00 when Stationary)
T 13-23, Sv 2+: Average Damage 2.00 (2.67 when Stationary)
Yes, you will get more killing power out of Multi-Meltas, but they need to be close.
gunchar wrote: One group mostly consisting of non-Sisters players says, everything is fine because you can jump through several hoops to do basic gak, here just look at how this Goonhammer article hypes up hot air, etc...
I think it should be noted that all Sisters and non-Sisters players are on the same number of games for 10th : zero.
cody.d. wrote: I'm getting 2 distinct vibes. 1 group is, okay, you can do this, this and this, there are options. And the other is fingers plugging their ears, saying lalala i can't hear you everything is terrible.
I'm also getting two distinct vibes:
One group mostly consisting of non-Sisters players says, everything is fine because you can jump through several hoops to do basic gak, here just look at how this Goonhammer article hypes up hot air, etc...
And the other group are most of the Sisters players(at least the ones who actually like to play competetively here and there).....
Not sure who is referencing goonhammer articles. And yes, "Jumping through several hoops to do basic gak" or you know, stacking buffs is what everyone has to do. Very few units/factions can just delete tanks nowdays.
And saying "your not a real sister's player cause you don't agree with me" is a terrible argument.
No unit works in a vacuum in 10th. Sisters have a decent toolbox that's the long and short of it.
H.B.M.C. wrote: We have the rules. We can make inferences from the rules. It has been this way for decades.
So why are high-level tournament players saying that Sisters look competitive? The only faction that I've seen a lot of concern about from the previews is that anything Nurgle-related seems a bit under-tuned. For everything else, there are combos that seem to provide tons of value and/or solve issues your army might have.
If Sisters get the right points values they will be fine. If not, hopefully GW is swift with the points updates.
Even Custodes. CUSTODES, have trouble deleting tanks. All our AT options are now inferior to just praying for 6's on mass cheap shooting. Our Axes are barely scratching anything remotely like a tank on a 4+, and our missile bikes might get 3-4 shots off, 1W getting through. Praying our FW stuff isn't nerfed into scrap, because that's all we have left. Right now Space Marines have better melee potential...
H.B.M.C. wrote: We have the rules. We can make inferences from the rules. It has been this way for decades.
So why are high-level tournament players saying that Sisters look competitive? The only faction that I've seen a lot of concern about from the previews is that anything Nurgle-related seems a bit under-tuned. For everything else, there are combos that seem to provide tons of value and/or solve issues your army might have.
If Sisters get the right points values they will be fine. If not, hopefully GW is swift with the points updates.
I wouldn't take Goonhammers opinion on it either. We're not going to really understand until we play enough missions.
H.B.M.C. wrote: We have the rules. We can make inferences from the rules. It has been this way for decades.
So why are high-level tournament players saying that Sisters look competitive? The only faction that I've seen a lot of concern about from the previews is that anything Nurgle-related seems a bit under-tuned. For everything else, there are combos that seem to provide tons of value and/or solve issues your army might have.
If Sisters get the right points values they will be fine. If not, hopefully GW is swift with the points updates.
I wouldn't take Goonhammers opinion on it either. We're not going to really understand until we play enough missions.
I'm talking about Art of War 40k, I haven't been following the Goonhammer stuff as closely this time around.
Let's assume 2 targets: Medium vehicle T9 3+ and heavy vehicle T11 2+
How many big vehicles are 2+? I picked the Repulsor over the Land Raider because it was still 3+ - and only mentioned the 2+ Vindicator because that was pretty much THE line (Rhinos and Preds popped, Vinidcator barely did not) for Average 1 Turn from Sisters Melta.
The marines use a CP which the sisters have no use for in this scenario, so I will balance it with 3 extra damage which is the average of a CP using the grenade strat as a reference (which the retributors could actually use in the short range scenario). I will not consider the inferno pistol in this scenario.
OotM will not be used because only 5 targets per game have that bonus, so it cannot be considered. To compensate for this, no miracle dices will be used, even if retributors actually come with 2 free miracles.
Sisters have no comparable CP usage - this is another ding for Sisters - not something to be handwaved with bonus Damage they have no access to. And why exactly wouldn't a Marine Player use OOM against the target he's landing a Drop Pod Bomb on? Its turn 1, you're aiming at the biggest baddest vehicle on the table - that OOM+ Discs can be front loaded while Miracle Dice are far more likely to be back loaded is another ding against Sisters that matters.
alextroy wrote: I have to wonder what good AT looks like in 10th Edition 40K.
Well, the Gladiator Lancer just kinda one-taps everything while being completely unsupported too. 2 shots, 2+ hit (you can re-roll one), 3+ wound (you can re-roll one), then 2x D6+3 damage (you can re-roll one).
alextroy wrote: I have to wonder what good AT looks like in 10th Edition 40K.
Well, the Gladiator Lancer just kinda one-taps everything while being completely unsupported too. 2 shots, 2+ hit (you can re-roll one), 3+ wound (you can re-roll one), then 2x D6+3 damage (you can re-roll one).
as far as Good Anti Tank which I'd take to mean better than median but less than gread: Yeah I'd put the Lancer, the Vindicator, The Repulsor Executioner in the "good" Anti Tank. Maybe the Predator Anhilator. Eldar Support Weapons with a D-Cannon, MAYBE the Vanquisher, the Demolisher, maybe the Rogal Dorn, Potentially Sentinels, probably Armiger Warglaives, Obviously most of the big Knights that are probably better than just "good" - Probably a full unit of Broadsides.Maybe the Hammerhead (yeah it's got the railgun, but its one shot per turn, and more of an "eye candy" for the S20 than reliable damage production than these other units that can more consistently pound T12, 15ish wounds) which brings us to the Sky Ray Gunship which is better but on the Maybe edge. The Stormsurge is better than good, but its knight adjacent. Nightbringer shard (may be better than just Good - hard to find that line) - the void dragon, Doomsday Ark is probably too good to be medium, but not good enough to be "good". Lokhust Heavy Destroyers are good. Doomstalker not quite. Doomscythe may be better than good, Monolith is probably not good, Deff Koptas are a maybe: BS 5+ S9 vs a zillion shots is hard to tell - Ghaz in melee is easily Good, and probably better than good. Gorkanaught is good. Meganobz probably. 3 Mekgunz with KMK? Maybe to probably always HAZARDOUS though... Morkanaught, sure. Stompa? Definitely. Almost definitely better than good too. Of course its also Knight+. Tank Bustas probably, but again always HAZARDOUS,
Dudeface wrote: I meant to include the summary from goonhammmer reviewing them, which is rarely that far off the mark:
General Unit Thoughts
With the boosts to Miracle Dice generation, some crazy combos, and just really good units, this army looks primed to actually do some damage in 10th edition. One of the problems I forsee is trying to figure out what Leaders to attach to what units, there is so many options that it can be a little daunting. I will say though, that is a good problem to have, that means this army has a bunch of good options.
Wrap Up
That’s it for the Sisters – overall, we’re pretty happy with where they are in 10th, with some straightforwardly good and useful abilities plus a range of helpful tricks which add a little more.
Hmm, my reply got apparently deleted cause of the meme, so here again without meme:
That whole article really reads less like a review and more like a presentatation by GW itself, spiced up with some hot air(like the nonsense about the allegedly crazy amount of leader options for example) and an overreliance on the word cool, and i'm not sure who they mean with "we're pretty happy" but definitely not Sisters players considering how very unhappy many of these were(and the Ad Mech article seems to be quite controversial as well, even though apparently to a lesser degree) with this article, this here was the most friendly but still fitting description of it i've seen:
It's wild seeing most Sisters players either generally disappointed or cautiously optimistic about certain possibilities based on how the points go and these guys going "YUP ARMY IS AMAZING!!"
It's an impressive disconnect.
Oh yeah, and i couldn't even write a simple sentence under that article, cause it's moderated and didn't work for some reason.
gunchar wrote: One group mostly consisting of non-Sisters players says, everything is fine because you can jump through several hoops to do basic gak, here just look at how this Goonhammer article hypes up hot air, etc...
I think it should be noted that all Sisters and non-Sisters players are on the same number of games for 10th : zero.
WH40K is no sorcery, and unlike players of other fraction Sisters players should have some more in-depth experience with + knowledge of the army, and better know what works in it, saying we don't know points yet would be fair(even though Sisters clearly were not a pretty much Horde army before), but what some non-Sisters players in this thread do is straight up gaslighting. Although some probably just genuinly don't know what they're even talking about, like:
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: Ah, the sweet tears of the people who spent most of 9th being one of the more broken wombo combos in the game, suddenly not being OP anymore.
"I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in OPness and were suddenly silenced."
I'm kinda glad sisters can't just rock up to a knight and one shot it with miracle dice anymore. It's almost.....balanced.
The straight up overrated(especially by Art of War, who simply continued to pretend Necrons and Sisters would be the two top armies fighting for first place, even after week for week reality + the actual statistics disagreed with them) actual Nephelim combo was Bloody Rose + Armor of Contempt + broken secondaries, in Arks of Omen with still Bloody Rose but no Armor of Contempt and less broken secondaries Sisters fell down hard, and even left GW's "goldielocks" zone"(45-55%) to below 45% multiple times. So now taking away Bloody Rose and replacing it with a somewhat juiced up absolutely not competetive Order, taking away all the most effective anti-tank options, drastically restricting aura combos, etc... is not balance but pretty much the exact opposite of that.
Not sure who is referencing goonhammer articles. And yes, "Jumping through several hoops to do basic gak" or you know, stacking buffs is what everyone has to do. Very few units/factions can just delete tanks nowdays.
Sisters aren't deleting tanks by stacking buffs, they just might have a chance to take out one or two big tanks by stacking multiple way too often easily disruptable/not very flexible buffs/avoidable combos, except they actually became dirt cheap now.
cody.d. wrote: And saying "your not a real sister's player cause you don't agree with me" is a terrible argument.
Are you a Sisters player, and when exactly did i even say anything about people not being real Sisters players? You really shouldn't build strawmans...
cody.d. wrote: No unit works in a vacuum in 10th. Sisters have a decent toolbox that's the long and short of it.
Sisters absolutely don't have a decent toolbox against anything that's really tough in that Index, they just might be cheap enough to make up for that glaring flaw.
And i will generally repeat the most important point here again:
Sisters are a slow + low range glass(meaning fragile) canon army.
, they desperately need to do far above average dmg, or else they straight up don't function.
Dudeface wrote: I meant to include the summary from goonhammmer reviewing them, which is rarely that far off the mark:
General Unit Thoughts
With the boosts to Miracle Dice generation, some crazy combos, and just really good units, this army looks primed to actually do some damage in 10th edition. One of the problems I forsee is trying to figure out what Leaders to attach to what units, there is so many options that it can be a little daunting. I will say though, that is a good problem to have, that means this army has a bunch of good options.
Wrap Up
That’s it for the Sisters – overall, we’re pretty happy with where they are in 10th, with some straightforwardly good and useful abilities plus a range of helpful tricks which add a little more.
Hmm, my reply got apparently deleted cause of the meme, so here again without meme:
That whole article really reads less like a review and more like a presentatation by GW itself, spiced up with some hot air(like the nonsense about the allegedly crazy amount of leader options for example) and an overreliance on the word cool, and i'm not sure who they mean with "we're pretty happy" but definitely not Sisters players considering how very unhappy many of these were(and the Ad Mech article seems to be quite controversial as well, even though apparently to a lesser degree) with this article, this here was the most friendly but still fitting description of it i've seen:
It's wild seeing most Sisters players either generally disappointed or cautiously optimistic about certain possibilities based on how the points go and these guys going "YUP ARMY IS AMAZING!!"
It's an impressive disconnect.
Oh yeah, and i couldn't even write a simple sentence under that article, cause it's moderated and didn't work for some reason.
gunchar wrote: One group mostly consisting of non-Sisters players says, everything is fine because you can jump through several hoops to do basic gak, here just look at how this Goonhammer article hypes up hot air, etc...
I think it should be noted that all Sisters and non-Sisters players are on the same number of games for 10th : zero.
WH40K is no sorcery, and unlike players of other fraction Sisters players should have some more in-depth experience with + knowledge of the army, and better know what works in it, saying we don't know points yet would be fair(even though Sisters clearly were not a pretty much Horde army before), but what some non-Sisters players in this thread do is straight up gaslighting. Although some probably just genuinly don't know what their even talking about, like:
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: Ah, the sweet tears of the people who spent most of 9th being one of the more broken wombo combos in the game, suddenly not being OP anymore.
"I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in OPness and were suddenly silenced."
I'm kinda glad sisters can't just rock up to a knight and one shot it with miracle dice anymore. It's almost.....balanced.
The straight up overrated(especially by Art of War, who simply continued to pretend Necrons and Sisters would be the two top armies fighting for first place, even after week for week reality + the actual statistics disagreed with them) actual Nephelim combo was Bloody Rose + Armor of Contempt + broken secondaries, in Arks of Omen with still Bloody Rose but no Armor of Contempt and less broken secondaries Sisters fell down hard, and even left GW's "goldielocks" zone"(45-55%) to below 45% multiple times. So now taking away Bloody Rose and replacing it with a somewhat juiced up absolutely not competetive Order, taking away all the most effective anti-tank options, drastically restricting aura combos, etc... is not balance but pretty much the exact opposite of that.
Not sure who is referencing goonhammer articles. And yes, "Jumping through several hoops to do basic gak" or you know, stacking buffs is what everyone has to do. Very few units/factions can just delete tanks nowdays.
Sisters aren't deleting tanks by stacking buffs, they just might have a chance to take out one or two big tanks by stacking multiple way too often easily disruptable/not very flexible buffs/avoidable combos, except they actually became dirt cheap now.
cody.d. wrote: And saying "your not a real sister's player cause you don't agree with me" is a terrible argument.
Are you a Sisters player, and when exactly did i even say anything about people not being real Sisters players? You really shouldn't build strawmans...
cody.d. wrote: No unit works in a vacuum in 10th. Sisters have a decent toolbox that's the long and short of it.
Sisters absolutely don't have a decent toolbox against anything that's really tough in that Index, they just might be cheap enough to make up for that glaring flaw.
And i will generally repeat the most important point here again:
Sisters are a slow + low range glass(meaning fragile) canon army.
, they desperately need to do far above average dmg, or else they straight up don't function.
You can just admit you're bad and lack the skill to play the new index. It's a better look than disagreeing with the people who literally play the game for a living and who generally do very well at tournaments.
cody.d. wrote: Durabilty for sisters has also gone up, a character gives 4++, medics give FNP and you can tank wounds on a character and heal 3 back a turn. And each character can be rezed with a stratagem.
A unit of retrubutors hopping out of an immolator also feel like they'd do a number on many tanks.
Also, I'm assuming melta went up to 9 so you don't have to wound the big T16 stuff like stompas on 6s.
a 4++ is useless on a Guardsman even more usless on a Sister. Medics have always given a FNP.
You can just admit you're bad and lack the skill to play the new index. It's a better look than disagreeing with the people who literally play the game for a living and who generally do very well at tournaments.
If doing something 'for a living' makes you unquestionably superior at it, then explain why GW's rules are so often error ridden...
Dudeface wrote: I meant to include the summary from goonhammmer reviewing them, which is rarely that far off the mark:
General Unit Thoughts
With the boosts to Miracle Dice generation, some crazy combos, and just really good units, this army looks primed to actually do some damage in 10th edition. One of the problems I forsee is trying to figure out what Leaders to attach to what units, there is so many options that it can be a little daunting. I will say though, that is a good problem to have, that means this army has a bunch of good options.
Wrap Up
That’s it for the Sisters – overall, we’re pretty happy with where they are in 10th, with some straightforwardly good and useful abilities plus a range of helpful tricks which add a little more.
Hmm, my reply got apparently deleted cause of the meme, so here again without meme:
That whole article really reads less like a review and more like a presentatation by GW itself, spiced up with some hot air(like the nonsense about the allegedly crazy amount of leader options for example) and an overreliance on the word cool, and i'm not sure who they mean with "we're pretty happy" but definitely not Sisters players considering how very unhappy many of these were(and the Ad Mech article seems to be quite controversial as well, even though apparently to a lesser degree) with this article, this here was the most friendly but still fitting description of it i've seen:
It's wild seeing most Sisters players either generally disappointed or cautiously optimistic about certain possibilities based on how the points go and these guys going "YUP ARMY IS AMAZING!!"
It's an impressive disconnect.
Oh yeah, and i couldn't even write a simple sentence under that article, cause it's moderated and didn't work for some reason.
gunchar wrote: One group mostly consisting of non-Sisters players says, everything is fine because you can jump through several hoops to do basic gak, here just look at how this Goonhammer article hypes up hot air, etc...
I think it should be noted that all Sisters and non-Sisters players are on the same number of games for 10th : zero.
WH40K is no sorcery, and unlike players of other fraction Sisters players should have some more in-depth experience with + knowledge of the army, and better know what works in it, saying we don't know points yet would be fair(even though Sisters clearly were not a pretty much Horde army before), but what some non-Sisters players in this thread do is straight up gaslighting. Although some probably just genuinly don't know what their even talking about, like:
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: Ah, the sweet tears of the people who spent most of 9th being one of the more broken wombo combos in the game, suddenly not being OP anymore.
"I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in OPness and were suddenly silenced."
I'm kinda glad sisters can't just rock up to a knight and one shot it with miracle dice anymore. It's almost.....balanced.
The straight up overrated(especially by Art of War, who simply continued to pretend Necrons and Sisters would be the two top armies fighting for first place, even after week for week reality + the actual statistics disagreed with them) actual Nephelim combo was Bloody Rose + Armor of Contempt + broken secondaries, in Arks of Omen with still Bloody Rose but no Armor of Contempt and less broken secondaries Sisters fell down hard, and even left GW's "goldielocks" zone"(45-55%) to below 45% multiple times. So now taking away Bloody Rose and replacing it with a somewhat juiced up absolutely not competetive Order, taking away all the most effective anti-tank options, drastically restricting aura combos, etc... is not balance but pretty much the exact opposite of that.
Not sure who is referencing goonhammer articles. And yes, "Jumping through several hoops to do basic gak" or you know, stacking buffs is what everyone has to do. Very few units/factions can just delete tanks nowdays.
Sisters aren't deleting tanks by stacking buffs, they just might have a chance to take out one or two big tanks by stacking multiple way too often easily disruptable/not very flexible buffs/avoidable combos, except they actually became dirt cheap now.
cody.d. wrote: And saying "your not a real sister's player cause you don't agree with me" is a terrible argument.
Are you a Sisters player, and when exactly did i even say anything about people not being real Sisters players? You really shouldn't build strawmans...
cody.d. wrote: No unit works in a vacuum in 10th. Sisters have a decent toolbox that's the long and short of it.
Sisters absolutely don't have a decent toolbox against anything that's really tough in that Index, they just might be cheap enough to make up for that glaring flaw.
And i will generally repeat the most important point here again:
Sisters are a slow + low range glass(meaning fragile) canon army.
, they desperately need to do far above average dmg, or else they straight up don't function.
You can just admit you're bad and lack the skill to play the new index. It's a better look than disagreeing with the people who literally play the game for a living and who generally do very well at tournaments.
Wow, you really didn't need to prove my gaslighting point so blatantly, but yeah sure me and all the other disappointed or underwhelmed Sisters players just need to git gud while Sisters master-players like you, FezzikDaBullgryn and cody.d. will make Index Sisters the star in the competetive scene XD...
You can just admit you're bad and lack the skill to play the new index. It's a better look than disagreeing with the people who literally play the game for a living and who generally do very well at tournaments.
If doing something 'for a living' makes you unquestionably superior at it, then explain why GW's rules are so often error ridden...
The players that play 40k for a living tend to build their following due to exceptional tournament results. Are you going to argue that Seigler and Nanavati don't know what they're talking about?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
gunchar wrote: Wow, you really didn't need to prove my gaslighting point so blatantly, but yeah sure me and all the other disappointed or underwhelmed Sisters players just need to git gud while Sisters master-players like you, FezzikDaBullgryn and cody.d. will make Index Sisters the star in the competetive scene XD...
I'm willing to bet that they end up as a top-half army and place well at tournaments with their rules as long as they aren't completely hosed by points. I'm also going to take Seigler and Nanavati's opinion on what works and what doesn't over some average Dakka poster's hot take.
You can just admit you're bad and lack the skill to play the new index. It's a better look than disagreeing with the people who literally play the game for a living and who generally do very well at tournaments.
If doing something 'for a living' makes you unquestionably superior at it, then explain why GW's rules are so often error ridden...
The players that play 40k for a living tend to build their following due to exceptional tournament results. Are you going to argue that Seigler and Nanavati don't know what they're talking about?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
gunchar wrote: Wow, you really didn't need to prove my gaslighting point so blatantly, but yeah sure me and all the other disappointed or underwhelmed Sisters players just need to git gud while Sisters master-players like you, FezzikDaBullgryn and cody.d. will make Index Sisters the star in the competetive scene XD...
I'm willing to bet that they end up as a top-half army and place well at tournaments with their rules as long as they aren't completely hosed by points.
They know the game, the armies they play and are pretty good at predicting the meta. But they get rules wrong or don't see winning lists before they happen too. But they get things wrong too. Sisters being a army they get details wrong frequently.
Lammia wrote: They know the game, the armies they play and are pretty good at predicting the meta. But they get rules wrong or don't see winning lists before they happen too. But they get things wrong too. Sisters being a army they get details wrong frequently.
Okay, so what specific Sisters details have they gotten wrong in their index preview?
I'm willing to bet that they end up as a top-half army and place well at tournaments with their rules as long as they aren't completely hosed by points.
And i'm willing to bet that you've never even played at least a beer and pretzels game with 9th Edition Martyred Lady Sisters, also not getting hosed by points at this point pretty much means to change the armies identity from somewhat Elite to at least somewhat Horde.
Canadian 5th wrote: I'm also going to take Seigler and Nanavati's opinion on what works and what doesn't over some average Dakka poster's hot take.
Let's just ignore for a second that an army which just really works in the hands of around Siegler lvl players would be obviously not balanced in the correct way, instead of substanceless name-droping, what exactly did Siegler and Nanavati say(in their of course totally not hot take XD) Sisters should do to kill big tanks for example, and even more importantly how exactly should we bring that combo to the target without getting disrupted/avoided/killed?
gunchar wrote: Let's just ignore for a second that an army which just really works in the hands of around Seigler lvl players would be obviously not balanced in the correct way
Why can't some armies have higher skill ceilings than others? If Sisters can do well in the hands of very skilled players then there isn't an issue with the rules, there's an issue with a bunch of people playing them badly.
what exactly did Seigler and Nanavati say(in their of course totally not hot take XD) Sisters should do to kill big tanks for example, and even more importantly how exactly should we bring that combo to the target without getting disrupted/avoided/killed?
Retributors + Dialogus + Triumph of St Catherine: Miracle Dice are always equal to 6. That combo turns your bad miracle dice into dead tanks.
Dominions + Palatine: Lethal hits on a unit with 4 Melta guns and access to miracle dice is nasty.
The fact is your army is going to need to generate and manipulate miracle dice to do well. You're probably going to want to take the relic that gives 1d3 miracle dice when that character dies and rocket a throwaway character into the enemy.
See my worry is they’ll points cost them similar
to what they were with marines last edition. I don’t think GW is leaning to make them a hoard army. Where for a few extra you more than double many of the profiles and are better in every regard. So you’re about the same price when really they should be half or a third.
The fact they dropped the larger squad size suggests they don’t see the army as hoard despite a single chaos marine having 4 attacks now.
Especially because they have all these buff characters but you can only buff a 10 wound T3 unit. As opposed to marines who can still take 20 wound bricks of infantry. It’s a huge misstep.
But yeah I think GW still view them as an elite army so are going to point cost them similar to marines. I just don’t see GW having marine armies be 30 models and Sisters being 70. Sisters basically worked because they could exploit the charge and go first mechanic to overkill a unit before they could strike back. With miracle dice you could arrange that and control the board. A more attrition game needs to account for that in the points.
Lammia wrote: They know the game, the armies they play and are pretty good at predicting the meta. But they get rules wrong or don't see winning lists before they happen too. But they get things wrong too. Sisters being a army they get details wrong frequently.
Okay, so what specific Sisters details have they gotten wrong in their index preview?
In this specific Index, none I've seen.
Though you have to be on the WarCom Hopium IV to write this from the Goonhammer review:
The Dialogus is just bananas, and looks like an auto include in any Retributor unit, slow roll saves on the non multi-melta toting model until it dies (for that sweet +1 to hit) and then burn miracle dice saving the rest (if needed), because wow, this is gonna be crazy. Oh and then once a model dies, feel free to use Rejoice the Fallen, to immediately shoot back with that Retributor unit. Ugh, this is just so wrong.
But when you read 'first turn of the Game' and say it's 'the first every turn' enough times that people actually play it that way, you actually become a rules problem for the game.
Lammia wrote: They know the game, the armies they play and are pretty good at predicting the meta. But they get rules wrong or don't see winning lists before they happen too. But they get things wrong too. Sisters being a army they get details wrong frequently.
Okay, so what specific Sisters details have they gotten wrong in their index preview?
In this specific Index, none I've seen.
Though you have to be on the WarCom Hopium IV to write this from the Goonhammer review:
The Dialogus is just bananas, and looks like an auto include in any Retributor unit, slow roll saves on the non multi-melta toting model until it dies (for that sweet +1 to hit) and then burn miracle dice saving the rest (if needed), because wow, this is gonna be crazy. Oh and then once a model dies, feel free to use Rejoice the Fallen, to immediately shoot back with that Retributor unit. Ugh, this is just so wrong.
But when you read 'first turn of the Game' and say it's 'the first every turn' enough times that people actually play it that way, you actually become a rules problem for the game.
The Dialogus with Triumph is actually nasty. As many miracle dice as you have are suddenly 6s and that unit you needed dead is now dead.
Lammia wrote: They know the game, the armies they play and are pretty good at predicting the meta. But they get rules wrong or don't see winning lists before they happen too. But they get things wrong too. Sisters being a army they get details wrong frequently.
Okay, so what specific Sisters details have they gotten wrong in their index preview?
In this specific Index, none I've seen.
Though you have to be on the WarCom Hopium IV to write this from the Goonhammer review:
The Dialogus is just bananas, and looks like an auto include in any Retributor unit, slow roll saves on the non multi-melta toting model until it dies (for that sweet +1 to hit) and then burn miracle dice saving the rest (if needed), because wow, this is gonna be crazy. Oh and then once a model dies, feel free to use Rejoice the Fallen, to immediately shoot back with that Retributor unit. Ugh, this is just so wrong.
But when you read 'first turn of the Game' and say it's 'the first every turn' enough times that people actually play it that way, you actually become a rules problem for the game.
The Dialogus with Triumph is actually nasty. As many miracle dice as you have are suddenly 6s and that unit you needed dead is now dead.
It's got potentual to maybe pop out and delete something valuable, midgame. But that's not what they are suggesting, they are suggesting there is a way to do real damage with a 5 woman T3 unit while it's being shot.
Lammia wrote: They know the game, the armies they play and are pretty good at predicting the meta. But they get rules wrong or don't see winning lists before they happen too. But they get things wrong too. Sisters being a army they get details wrong frequently.
Okay, so what specific Sisters details have they gotten wrong in their index preview?
In this specific Index, none I've seen.
Though you have to be on the WarCom Hopium IV to write this from the Goonhammer review:
The Dialogus is just bananas, and looks like an auto include in any Retributor unit, slow roll saves on the non multi-melta toting model until it dies (for that sweet +1 to hit) and then burn miracle dice saving the rest (if needed), because wow, this is gonna be crazy. Oh and then once a model dies, feel free to use Rejoice the Fallen, to immediately shoot back with that Retributor unit. Ugh, this is just so wrong.
But when you read 'first turn of the Game' and say it's 'the first every turn' enough times that people actually play it that way, you actually become a rules problem for the game.
The Dialogus with Triumph is actually nasty. As many miracle dice as you have are suddenly 6s and that unit you needed dead is now dead.
It's got potentual to maybe pop out and delete something valuable, midgame. But that's not what they are suggesting, they are suggesting there is a way to do real damage with a 5 woman T3 unit while it's being shot.
The idea that you can get just one model killed is a best case scenario idea, but even the baseline of multimedia plus dialogus plus triumph is nasty and can come online as early as turn 2 if you suicide some cheap units to generate miracle dice.
Lammia wrote: Though you have to be on the WarCom Hopium IV to write this from the Goonhammer review:
I mean strictly speaking they are not wrong. If you have an undamaged retributor squad with a dialogus standing within 6" of the triumph and fifteen of your units have just been wiped off the board you can replace all of their multimelta attack, wound, and damage dice with 6s.
The Rejoice the Fallen trick also appears to work as advertised if you have another couple of dozen miracle dice for saves and the bonus attack. Hopefully your opponent doesn't shoot the triumph or use any save-bypassing weapons, or shoot at them from more than 18" away, or with cheap infantry.
Solid combo. Though if you have that many miracle dice to hand you might be in a spot of trouble elsewhere :p
Lammia wrote: They know the game, the armies they play and are pretty good at predicting the meta. But they get rules wrong or don't see winning lists before they happen too. But they get things wrong too. Sisters being a army they get details wrong frequently.
Okay, so what specific Sisters details have they gotten wrong in their index preview?
In this specific Index, none I've seen.
Though you have to be on the WarCom Hopium IV to write this from the Goonhammer review:
The Dialogus is just bananas, and looks like an auto include in any Retributor unit, slow roll saves on the non multi-melta toting model until it dies (for that sweet +1 to hit) and then burn miracle dice saving the rest (if needed), because wow, this is gonna be crazy. Oh and then once a model dies, feel free to use Rejoice the Fallen, to immediately shoot back with that Retributor unit. Ugh, this is just so wrong.
But when you read 'first turn of the Game' and say it's 'the first every turn' enough times that people actually play it that way, you actually become a rules problem for the game.
The Dialogus with Triumph is actually nasty. As many miracle dice as you have are suddenly 6s and that unit you needed dead is now dead.
It's got potentual to maybe pop out and delete something valuable, midgame. But that's not what they are suggesting, they are suggesting there is a way to do real damage with a 5 woman T3 unit while it's being shot.
The idea that you can get just one model killed is a best case scenario idea, but even the baseline of multimedia plus dialogus plus triumph is nasty and can come online as early as turn 2 if you suicide some cheap units to generate miracle dice.
I also think it's interesting that the entire army can now use miracle dice- even Arcoflagellants, Penitent Engines, etc.
I will be curious to see what the other five Sisters detachments look like when the Codex drops. It is possible that some of the places that look like the synergy is slightly off might look less that way in a different detachment.
Lammia wrote: They know the game, the armies they play and are pretty good at predicting the meta. But they get rules wrong or don't see winning lists before they happen too. But they get things wrong too. Sisters being a army they get details wrong frequently.
Okay, so what specific Sisters details have they gotten wrong in their index preview?
In this specific Index, none I've seen.
Though you have to be on the WarCom Hopium IV to write this from the Goonhammer review:
The Dialogus is just bananas, and looks like an auto include in any Retributor unit, slow roll saves on the non multi-melta toting model until it dies (for that sweet +1 to hit) and then burn miracle dice saving the rest (if needed), because wow, this is gonna be crazy. Oh and then once a model dies, feel free to use Rejoice the Fallen, to immediately shoot back with that Retributor unit. Ugh, this is just so wrong.
But when you read 'first turn of the Game' and say it's 'the first every turn' enough times that people actually play it that way, you actually become a rules problem for the game.
The Dialogus with Triumph is actually nasty. As many miracle dice as you have are suddenly 6s and that unit you needed dead is now dead.
It's got potentual to maybe pop out and delete something valuable, midgame. But that's not what they are suggesting, they are suggesting there is a way to do real damage with a 5 woman T3 unit while it's being shot.
The idea that you can get just one model killed is a best case scenario idea, but even the baseline of multimedia plus dialogus plus triumph is nasty and can come online as early as turn 2 if you suicide some cheap units to generate miracle dice.
What cheap units?
Death cult assassins? Crusaders? Arcos? Pengines? Mortifiers? Priests inside said units? Sisters are spoiled for choices when it comes to cheap units to martyrize.
Lammia wrote: Though you have to be on the WarCom Hopium IV to write this from the Goonhammer review:
I mean strictly speaking they are not wrong. If you have an undamaged retributor squad with a dialogus standing within 6" of the triumph and fifteen of your units have just been wiped off the board you can replace all of their multimelta attack, wound, and damage dice with 6s.
The Rejoice the Fallen trick also appears to work as advertised if you have another couple of dozen miracle dice for saves and the bonus attack. Hopefully your opponent doesn't shoot the triumph or use any save-bypassing weapons, or shoot at them from more than 18" away, or with cheap infantry.
Solid combo. Though if you have that many miracle dice to hand you might be in a spot of trouble elsewhere :p
It was a specific snark at the general tone of the 'review'.
Lammia wrote: They know the game, the armies they play and are pretty good at predicting the meta. But they get rules wrong or don't see winning lists before they happen too. But they get things wrong too. Sisters being a army they get details wrong frequently.
Okay, so what specific Sisters details have they gotten wrong in their index preview?
In this specific Index, none I've seen.
Though you have to be on the WarCom Hopium IV to write this from the Goonhammer review:
The Dialogus is just bananas, and looks like an auto include in any Retributor unit, slow roll saves on the non multi-melta toting model until it dies (for that sweet +1 to hit) and then burn miracle dice saving the rest (if needed), because wow, this is gonna be crazy. Oh and then once a model dies, feel free to use Rejoice the Fallen, to immediately shoot back with that Retributor unit. Ugh, this is just so wrong.
But when you read 'first turn of the Game' and say it's 'the first every turn' enough times that people actually play it that way, you actually become a rules problem for the game.
The Dialogus with Triumph is actually nasty. As many miracle dice as you have are suddenly 6s and that unit you needed dead is now dead.
It's got potentual to maybe pop out and delete something valuable, midgame. But that's not what they are suggesting, they are suggesting there is a way to do real damage with a 5 woman T3 unit while it's being shot.
The idea that you can get just one model killed is a best case scenario idea, but even the baseline of multimedia plus dialogus plus triumph is nasty and can come online as early as turn 2 if you suicide some cheap units to generate miracle dice.
What cheap units?
Take whatever character ends up cheapest, give them the enhancement that generates d3 miracle dice when they die, fire them at the enemy and spend a CP so the enemy has to kill them, pocket the 1+d3 miracle dice you just gained.
Lammia wrote: They know the game, the armies they play and are pretty good at predicting the meta. But they get rules wrong or don't see winning lists before they happen too. But they get things wrong too. Sisters being a army they get details wrong frequently.
Okay, so what specific Sisters details have they gotten wrong in their index preview?
In this specific Index, none I've seen.
Though you have to be on the WarCom Hopium IV to write this from the Goonhammer review:
The Dialogus is just bananas, and looks like an auto include in any Retributor unit, slow roll saves on the non multi-melta toting model until it dies (for that sweet +1 to hit) and then burn miracle dice saving the rest (if needed), because wow, this is gonna be crazy. Oh and then once a model dies, feel free to use Rejoice the Fallen, to immediately shoot back with that Retributor unit. Ugh, this is just so wrong.
But when you read 'first turn of the Game' and say it's 'the first every turn' enough times that people actually play it that way, you actually become a rules problem for the game.
The Dialogus with Triumph is actually nasty. As many miracle dice as you have are suddenly 6s and that unit you needed dead is now dead.
It's got potentual to maybe pop out and delete something valuable, midgame. But that's not what they are suggesting, they are suggesting there is a way to do real damage with a 5 woman T3 unit while it's being shot.
The idea that you can get just one model killed is a best case scenario idea, but even the baseline of multimedia plus dialogus plus triumph is nasty and can come online as early as turn 2 if you suicide some cheap units to generate miracle dice.
What cheap units?
Death cult assassins? Crusaders? Arcos? Pengines? Mortifiers? Priests inside said units? Sisters are spoiled for choices when it comes to cheap units to martyrize.
Ok, how will you ensure they get shot to feed you and not, you know units that actually do something. (I'm sorry, I'm adding conditions here)
BertBert wrote: So the strat is to bring several squads of 2 crusaders for 20 points each and have them suicide to fuel our damage dealers with miracle dice?
No. No one is going to waste their time shooting them.
BertBert wrote: So the strat is to bring several squads of 2 crusaders for 20 points each and have them suicide to fuel our damage dealers with miracle dice?
No. No one is going to waste their time shooting them.
BertBert wrote: So the strat is to bring three squads of 2 crusaders for 60 points and have them suicide to fuel our damage dealers with miracle dice?
If you don't want to be chancing 5+ for meltagun wounds you need one sacrifice and 35pts for the dialogus dice, and then three more squads per weapon.
A single retributor squad, including cherub benefits, would be 165pts base plus 380pts of dead crusaders - so 545 points for three turns of automatic wounds with four multimeltas.
Rolls to hit, damage, saves, etc still required as normal.
Statistically you'd shave a few points off that to account for the fact that the dialogus sacrifice unit might roll a 5+ on it's own.
I do think Retributors are about where they should be. Eradicators might need a small bump, but they have half the shots, less access to buffs, and no MD.
( this is disregarding flamer and HB Rets since the value on those is questionable )
AtoMaki wrote: Not really because SM Eradicators are 95.
Even if they weren't, 4 devastators with cover ignoring lascannons are still 10 points cheaper than 4 multimelta retributors.
You can get the better part of three devastator squads for the same points as two retributor squads with the dialogus, and you'd be picking poorly from the marine codex if you did.
Daedalus81 wrote: Eradicators might need a small bump, but they have half the shots, less access to buffs, and no MD.
Eradicators re-roll everything as an innate ability, so they neither need buffs nor MD. I think the costs should be swapped at the bare minimum, tho I would rather cost the Retributors to 90 (50 for the 5 girls and 40 for the 4 MMs).
Daedalus81 wrote: I do think Retributors are about where they should be. Eradicators might need a small bump, but they have half the shots, less access to buffs, and no MD.
( this is disregarding flamer and HB Rets since the value on those is questionable )
Explain how they're more expensive than Devastator marines? Please?
Also, how can they have less access to buffs than ZERO? Or are you going to attach a 35pt character onto 130pt 5 model T3 unit so that the ONE turn per game they get to shoot, they get ONE free six on the miracle dice?
Automatically Appended Next Post: So here's a pretty Standard Sisters list for 10th:
Daedalus81 wrote: I do think Retributors are about where they should be. Eradicators might need a small bump, but they have half the shots, less access to buffs, and no MD.
( this is disregarding flamer and HB Rets since the value on those is questionable )
Explain how they're more expensive than Devastator marines? Please?
Also, how can they have less access to buffs than ZERO? Or are you going to attach a 35pt character onto 130pt 5 model T3 unit so that the ONE turn per game they get to shoot, they get ONE free six on the miracle dice?
Automatically Appended Next Post: So here's a pretty Standard Sisters list for 10th:
Daedalus81 wrote: Eradicators might need a small bump, but they have half the shots, less access to buffs, and no MD.
Eradicators re-roll everything as an innate ability, so they neither need buffs nor MD. I think the costs should be swapped at the bare minimum, tho I would rather cost the Retributors to 90 (50 for the 5 girls and 40 for the 4 MMs).
That they do - I forgot the MM was 4+ for marines in the other thread, so...
AtoMaki wrote: Not really because SM Eradicators are 95.
Even if they weren't, 4 devastators with cover ignoring lascannons are still 10 points cheaper than 4 multimelta retributors.
You can get the better part of three devastator squads for the same points as two retributor squads with the dialogus, and you'd be picking poorly from the marine codex if you did.
How can you get a dev squad with 4 lascannons for cheaper than a retributer squad?
- Most of the Close combat infantry seems very well costed
- Characters are cheap enough even with the ten woman squads to just add as an upgrade.
- Paragons are, a little too expensive. Is it as good as ten sacrosanct or Repentia that are cheaper or a few tanks? I think 200 was the right level.
- Sisters getting melta guns in the points is good. Although, I am not convinced they’re quite at the right points bracket. They’re still a little over half the cost of a ten man marine squad which more than doubled but their profile and are better in every way. Whilst internally, because everything is so cheap I am not sure why you wouldn’t just take the better units that have comparable points. It’s probably workable to do an infantry hoarde of Sisters but there’s a lot tempting you not to do that. I think they should have been 90 points to make a much clearer distinction and let you outnumber marines.
But overall, yeah 2000 points you can get a lot of options with those point values and free guns.
Daedalus81 wrote: Eradicators might need a small bump, but they have half the shots, less access to buffs, and no MD.
Eradicators re-roll everything as an innate ability, so they neither need buffs nor MD. I think the costs should be swapped at the bare minimum, tho I would rather cost the Retributors to 90 (50 for the 5 girls and 40 for the 4 MMs).
That they do - I forgot the MM was 4+ for marines in the other thread, so...
8 * .5 * .388 = 1.55 - sub MD for a 6 on damage -- 0.55 * 3.5 = 1.93 + 6 = 7.9
25% more. 90 * 1.25 = 113
Both units can get Lethal. Rets can get +1/+1 through multiple means, and reroll full wounds.
I'm not saying it's perfect, but it also isn't absurd.
Retri cant get +1 to wound unless they are down to 2 left which at t3 and 1wound is really close to just plain dead.
If you want full rerolls to wound from the immo you have to have disembarked from that immo this turn so you are essentially sacrificing.
Lets not forget the SM units are orders of magnitude tougher with t4 and multiple wounds+ having literally twice the range which means they can shoot from the backfield and cover alot more easily as well as remaining stationary for + to hit from heavy.
So with all that in addition to costing more I would have hoped the retri would have a higher damage output but they dont.
Daedalus81 wrote: I do think Retributors are about where they should be. Eradicators might need a small bump, but they have half the shots, less access to buffs, and no MD.
( this is disregarding flamer and HB Rets since the value on those is questionable )
Explain how they're more expensive than Devastator marines? Please?
Also, how can they have less access to buffs than ZERO? Or are you going to attach a 35pt character onto 130pt 5 model T3 unit so that the ONE turn per game they get to shoot, they get ONE free six on the miracle dice?
Automatically Appended Next Post: So here's a pretty Standard Sisters list for 10th:
You still have 255pts left, but it's probably best to just leave those open to try and deny secondaries.
Exos, Crusaders, DCAs are all awful. Triamph is actually cheap enough to chuck in your BSS...
Exos have indirect fire. Besides, what else are you gonna take? Retributors for 10pts less? At least Exos can shoot more than once per game. Crusaders and Deathcults are cheap, can stand on objectives, and are annoying to remove. Which is more than ANY of the other infantry units can do. The Triumph gives up free assasinate points. I'm only taking Celestine because I like her, not because she's good.
It's a joke list, but not THAT much of a joke list.
Daedalus81 wrote: Eradicators might need a small bump, but they have half the shots, less access to buffs, and no MD.
Eradicators re-roll everything as an innate ability, so they neither need buffs nor MD. I think the costs should be swapped at the bare minimum, tho I would rather cost the Retributors to 90 (50 for the 5 girls and 40 for the 4 MMs).
That they do - I forgot the MM was 4+ for marines in the other thread, so...
Retri cant get +1 to wound unless they are down to 2 left which at t3 and 1wound is really close to just plain dead.
If you want full rerolls to wound from the immo you have to have disembarked from that immo this turn so you are essentially sacrificing.
Lets not forget the SM units are orders of magnitude tougher with t4 and multiple wounds+ having literally twice the range which means they can shoot from the backfield and cover alot more easily as well as remaining stationary for + to hit from heavy.
So with all that in addition to costing more I would have hoped the retri would have a higher damage output but they dont.
Absolutely - totally conditional stuff, but check this out...
4 * .666 * .583 * 3.5 = 5.4 -- that's two Rets left alive with no MD producing output that is pretty close to the Eradicators with full rerolls.
Retri cant get +1 to wound unless they are down to 2 left which at t3 and 1wound is really close to just plain dead.
If you want full rerolls to wound from the immo you have to have disembarked from that immo this turn so you are essentially sacrificing.
Lets not forget the SM units are orders of magnitude tougher with t4 and multiple wounds+ having literally twice the range which means they can shoot from the backfield and cover alot more easily as well as remaining stationary for + to hit from heavy.
So with all that in addition to costing more I would have hoped the retri would have a higher damage output but they dont.
Absolutely - totally conditional stuff, but check this out...
4 * .666 * .583 * 3.5 = 5.4 -- that's two Rets left alive with no MD producing output that is pretty close to the Eradicators with full rerolls.
Daedalus81 wrote: Eradicators might need a small bump, but they have half the shots, less access to buffs, and no MD.
Eradicators re-roll everything as an innate ability, so they neither need buffs nor MD. I think the costs should be swapped at the bare minimum, tho I would rather cost the Retributors to 90 (50 for the 5 girls and 40 for the 4 MMs).
That they do - I forgot the MM was 4+ for marines in the other thread, so...
ERJAK wrote: If we're creating imaginary scenarios that will never happen in practical reality, I'd like a pony.
It's not something you count on, but it's something of value.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
AtoMaki wrote: They re-roll the Damage too, so that 3.5 is more like 4.5.
Ah, right. That will skew it in their favor more and I'm not against them getting an increase, but I don't think it's that far off.
Basic problem with retri is its 130 points for a unit you will only get to fire once. They are too fragile and their weapons too short range to expect anything else.
So, I'm sort of past the 'Sky is falling' part and towards the 'I guess we'll just make do' part.
SO a REAL attempt at a list.
Straight off, DO NOT take a full Sisters army. There's absolutely no reason to do so when Knights are basically free and Vindicares pay YOU to bring them.
Vindicare 80
Greyfax 65
Knight Crusader 415 (This is just the type I have painted. Honestly, which Knight to bring is the most interesting question in the whole army.)
Triumph 150
Celestine 150
Exorcist 140
Exorcist 140
Exorcist 140
Battle Sisters 110
Zephyrim 140
Novitiates 90
Novitiates 90
Rhino 80
Rhino 80
Crusader 20
Crusader 20
Missionary 35
Palatine 55
Honestly not sure if the characters are worth it. Basically, you use the Knight and the Vindicare for the heavy lifting, you use the Triumph Buffed (Unlimited AoF+FNP) Exorcists to hide behind a ruin and plink off wounds. Everything else is there to either sit on objectives, screen, or die to get more MD.
The players that play 40k for a living tend to build their following due to exceptional tournament results. Are you going to argue that Seigler and Nanavati don't know what they're talking about?
Nanavati has made a living out of having no idea what he was talking about. At the height of Harlequin power in ninth edition this delusional feth was saying they were at best a B-tier army because he was awful with them and couldn't make them work.
You can easily be good at a game while also being kind of an idiot who has no idea what you are talking about.
Void__Dragon wrote: Nanavati has made a living out of having no idea what he was talking about. At the height of Harlequin power in ninth edition this delusional feth was saying they were at best a B-tier army because he was awful with them and couldn't make them work.
You can easily be good at a game while also being kind of an idiot who has no idea what you are talking about.
Maybe I'm forgetting my timings, but I think he (and half the professional scene) didn't twig Harlequins out of the gate because they spent a day reading the Eldar bit of the book and by the time Harlequins came along had got bored/tired. I sort of have some sympathy because I essentially did the same.
His argument on Ork Buggies was more contrary to reality. "It's allergic to trees."
"Oh wait, hang on, its tabling whole armies turn 1."
Maybe he'd recently been playing on some table set up for Mordheim. But I think it was more this professional scene "the game isn't just mathhammer" flex - but "afraid when its that busted, it is."
The players that play 40k for a living tend to build their following due to exceptional tournament results. Are you going to argue that Seigler and Nanavati don't know what they're talking about?
Nanavati has made a living out of having no idea what he was talking about. At the height of Harlequin power in ninth edition this delusional feth was saying they were at best a B-tier army because he was awful with them and couldn't make them work.
You can easily be good at a game while also being kind of an idiot who has no idea what you are talking about.
Also, you can just lie because having a positive attitude gets better viewer retention.
Maybe I'm forgetting my timings, but I think he (and half the professional scene) didn't twig Harlequins out of the gate because they spent a day reading the Eldar bit of the book and by the time Harlequins came along had got bored/tired. I sort of have some sympathy because I essentially did the same.
His argument on Ork Buggies was more contrary to reality. "It's allergic to trees."
"Oh wait, hang on, its tabling whole armies turn 1."
Maybe he'd recently been playing on some table set up for Mordheim. But I think it was more this professional scene "the game isn't just mathhammer" flex - but "afraid when its that busted, it is."
Out the gate my fething ass. He was saying that about Harlequins when they had been regularly crushing podiums for like a month or two and had what? A 60% win rate or higher? I forget what they were rocking in their 9e prime.
But he apparently consistently had a problem getting them to work against other high level players. So of course he thought "I'm a great player, if I can't play this faction against top players with their top lists it can't be a great army!"
And everybody, even the AoW fanbase, knew he was delusional. And that's fine. He's a human being like anyone else. I was certainly delusional about the strength of the Daemons codex in ninth when it was released. Don't put him on some pedestal just because he happens to be very good at the game, he can easily be wrong about things pertaining to that game, like how Dopa of League of Legends fame (very skilled high elo player) made the hot take that Ryze after his latest rework was basically useless and wouldn't be seen in Worlds only for surprise Pikachu face for him to be the most dominant champion of Worlds.
Nanavati has made a living out of having no idea what he was talking about. At the height of Harlequin power in ninth edition this delusional feth was saying they were at best a B-tier army because he was awful with them and couldn't make them work.
You can easily be good at a game while also being kind of an idiot who has no idea what you are talking about.
And GK were suppose to be the OP in 8th, and that is why they needed smite nerfs and damage nerfs, because they were too good. I respect for what the guy achived as a tournament player. But some of his takes make no sense at all.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
ERJAK 810282 11550929 wrote:
Also, you can just lie because having a positive attitude gets better viewer retention.
Well that isn't really true. All the media organisations in all countries, all across the planet live out of the fact that they show negative stuff. In fact when stuff gets better or good, they suffer decline in readership/viewership etc. People can ignore someone being not factualy true, if they are entertaining, and not trying to preach. But whole swath of internet exist only to focused on the negative. Now companies that supply you with products 100% want you to be happy and positive about everything. The problem with w40k and GW is that a lot of excusses other companies can make, do not work for GW. They are on their 10th edition, with decades of expiriance and the opposit of small indy developer.
Nanavati has made a living out of having no idea what he was talking about. At the height of Harlequin power in ninth edition this delusional feth was saying they were at best a B-tier army because he was awful with them and couldn't make them work.
You can easily be good at a game while also being kind of an idiot who has no idea what you are talking about.
And GK were suppose to be the OP in 8th, and that is why they needed smite nerfs and damage nerfs, because they were too good. I respect for what the guy achived as a tournament player. But some of his takes make no sense at all.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
ERJAK 810282 11550929 wrote:
Also, you can just lie because having a positive attitude gets better viewer retention.
Well that isn't really true. All the media organisations in all countries, all across the planet live out of the fact that they show negative stuff. In fact when stuff gets better or good, they suffer decline in readership/viewership etc. People can ignore someone being not factualy true, if they are entertaining, and not trying to preach. But whole swath of internet exist only to focused on the negative. Now companies that supply you with products 100% want you to be happy and positive about everything. The problem with w40k and GW is that a lot of excusses other companies can make, do not work for GW. They are on their 10th edition, with decades of expiriance and the opposit of small indy developer.
For NEWS negativity sells.
For luxury entertainment, it's generally more complicated. For every 'Velma was successful because of hatewatching' there's at least 1 'I just can't watch him because he's so negative all the time!'.
For luxury entertainment, it's generally more complicated. For every 'Velma was successful because of hatewatching' there's at least 1 'I just can't watch him because he's so negative all the time!'.
people generally like to watch something that makes them feel positive about their hobby purchases, If I just spend 250 bucks on Leviathen for the tyranid minis I, as a person, proably don't want to hear "TYRANIDS ARE GARBAGE ALL THESE MODELS SUCK!"
They want to feel energy for their hobby, no one wants to spend 15 minutes listening to someone telling them the game they're investing in was a waste of money
For luxury entertainment, it's generally more complicated. For every 'Velma was successful because of hatewatching' there's at least 1 'I just can't watch him because he's so negative all the time!'.
people generally like to watch something that makes them feel positive about their hobby purchases, If I just spend 250 bucks on Leviathen for the tyranid minis I, as a person, proably don't want to hear "TYRANIDS ARE GARBAGE ALL THESE MODELS SUCK!"
They want to feel energy for their hobby, no one wants to spend 15 minutes listening to someone telling them the game they're investing in was a waste of money
I don't know. I think if I'd spent $250 on something that would ultimately be a bit of a lemon, I'd rather somebody tell me and make me feel a little stupid than toil futilely with my purchase, probably spend some more money to make it better, and ultimately give it all up eventually anyways.
On a related note, I hate that Goonhammer titled its articles on the various indices as "reviews". Those weren't reviews, they were puff pieces. I'm not trusting anything they say again.
For luxury entertainment, it's generally more complicated. For every 'Velma was successful because of hatewatching' there's at least 1 'I just can't watch him because he's so negative all the time!'.
people generally like to watch something that makes them feel positive about their hobby purchases, If I just spend 250 bucks on Leviathen for the tyranid minis I, as a person, proably don't want to hear "TYRANIDS ARE GARBAGE ALL THESE MODELS SUCK!"
They want to feel energy for their hobby, no one wants to spend 15 minutes listening to someone telling them the game they're investing in was a waste of money
I don't know. I think if I'd spent $250 on something that would ultimately be a bit of a lemon, I'd rather somebody tell me and make me feel a little stupid than toil futilely with my purchase, probably spend some more money to make it better, and ultimately give it all up eventually anyways.
On a related note, I hate that Goonhammer titled its articles on the various indices as "reviews". Those weren't reviews, they were puff pieces. I'm not trusting anything they say again.
Amusingly, Goonhammer’s Ad Mech review has now been followed up by a (much longer) more accurate one saying how awful that index is
Goonhammer have largely been GW hype men for years, possibly due to Wings being the main competitive 40k writer and he seems pathologically incapable of doing anything but accentuating the positive and being mindlessly optimistic. Like him pretending ninth wasn't the giant shitshow it was. Thankfully one of the other guys had the balls to bring up how ninth didn't deserve to be thought of so positively when game warping balance issues and problem factions were allowed to exist in those states for literally six months or more at a time.
1) Space Marines got shock assault and bolter discipline integrated into their profile for free. Sisters didn’t get sacred rites or their anti psyker resistance added.
2) Sisters cost far too much relative to marines. A T3 1W model is not worth 11 points when for a handful of extra points you can get a 2W 4A Chaos Legionary with better WS. You want movie marines, you pay the points for them.
3) Some squads retributors with worse guns, half the wounds and lower toughness cost more than their marine equivalents.
4) Sisters don’t have reliable anti tank because melta took a huge hit.
5) Squad sizes don’t line up with how you want to play them. This should be a horde army which you use characters to buff. No point doing that on a 10 woman squad.
I put this down to two things.
People really want marines to be better than Sisters of Battle but refuse to believe they should also be cheaper in terms of points. Sisters have always been at that mid point between a Guardsman and a Marine; so there they shall remain. Yeah, that was before stuff like Gaunts and Genecult could regenerate their units for free. Before marines could have five attacks.
All this “they just need bloody rose” is silly. They need to go back to drawing board fundamentally. Is this a horde army in power armour in which case it should be cheap with huge squads for you to buff. Or, you boost the profile to actually be at the midpoint between a marine and a guardsmen.
Like if your rulebook says Sisters of Battle are famed for their durability because they wear power armour and every single commentator says their units die to a stray breeze then something ain’t right with the rules. This should not be a sneaky objective army that plays the mission. This should be a very blunt and loud army that is about overpowering the enemy. So the rules don’t reflect their lore, theme or models at all.
Totalwar1402 wrote: Like if your rulebook says Sisters of Battle are famed for their durability because they wear power armour and every single commentator says their units die to a stray breeze then something ain’t right with the rules. This should not be a sneaky objective army that plays the mission. This should be a very blunt and loud army that is about overpowering the enemy. So the rules don’t reflect their lore, theme or models at all.
Feel and fun is for loyalist Astartes, apparently.
I don't think that "people" want sister to cost more then marines for weaker units of the same type. They just don't care about armies they don't play. That is a general trait of w40k players. There are very few real "hates" as far as various faction or entire community goes.
And SoB, like any faction which is based on its models/units being dead, has to be a swarm. Either that or the base rules for SoB shouldn't be based around the idea of their units being dead. Votan have the same problem, and they also are costed like an elite army.
Sisters are going to be S and T 3 with 3+ armour and BS3. That is between a marine and a guardsman, not much to play with there.
If they’re not going to be a horde army, then “miracles” and “faith” abilities need to go a lot further. Sister meltas need to have a way to increase the ability to wound a target more frequently . Flamers need to hit harder. Even their bolters should have an ability to be boosted for more AP. The army shouldn’t be a blunt instrument, but require synergy with characters to improve their efficiency. There should also be more defensive buffs.
bullyboy wrote: Sisters are going to be S and T 3 with 3+ armour and BS3. That is between a marine and a guardsman, not much to play with there.
If they’re not going to be a horde army, then “miracles” and “faith” abilities need to go a lot further. Sister meltas need to have a way to increase the ability to wound a target more frequently . Flamers need to hit harder. Even their bolters should have an ability to be boosted for more AP. The army shouldn’t be a blunt instrument, but require synergy with characters to improve their efficiency. There should also be more defensive buffs.
We already had the edition where special rules to compensate for the profile and points being bad. What should have happened is that like Shock Assault and Bolter discipline being brought into the profile Sisters should have got their profile boosted.
For me there’s two options:
1) Your normal sister of battle gets WS3 plus, 2 attacks and 2 wounds. No change in points.
So those extra points for the Intercessor get you your strength, toughness and the better gun. You’re even still rocking an extra attack over the Sister. The extra wound, exactly in line with Terminator and Aggressor armour is because they are wearing armour. I don’t think that does anything to break the game and they’d still be dying to D2 guns. But it means ten sisters are actually a reasonable amount of wounds and attacks.
2) They become 7 points per model and you can take them in blocks of 20. I do not care if they die at that point.
Now I think option 1 is by far the most consistent with lore. They are the marine lite faction and it just reflects that what a marine is has changed since 3rd edition and the Sisters profile should reflect this inflation.
Like I’d much rather see the profile and points change around durability than something silly like giving every Sister devastating hits to represent mini acts of faith or something like that.
I think buffing Melta is the way to go to make sisters feel better. Would the Melta rules be better if rather then apply to damage the melta rule buffed the strength of the attack in close? so at range of 9 a Multi Melta was 2 Str 11 d6 damage attacks, instead of 2 str 9 d6+2 attacks?
I think buffing Melta is the way to go to make sisters feel better. Would the Melta rules be better if rather then apply to damage the melta rule buffed the strength of the attack in close? so at range of 9 a Multi Melta was 2 Str 11 d6 damage attacks, instead of 2 str 9 d6+2 attacks?
Marines having 2 wounds and 3 attacks also doesn’t feel right. You can’t inflate the profile of several armies, leave Sisters in same place and be surprised when they can’t compete. Marines got two wounds purely to buff survivability because people felt they were dying too easily to represent these power armoured soldiers. This is exactly the same reason Sisters should get 2 wounds. They die far too easily. In third, what you had to worry about a tactical squad with a plasma gun and missile launcher shooting you. Where AP wasn’t degrading.
Melta is an issue but I think the base statline needs a serious rethink. Lore says it’s a durable army because they wear power armour and that’s not well represented by the rules.
There’s this really bad underlying sentiment that they should be vastly worse than marines. Even though the lore, Dawn of Fire for example, has them killing Chaos Space Marines and holding their own. Not one marine has the output of half a squad of battle sisters or random initiate has more attacks than a Canoness.
Main example. Celestine. This character is meant to be a Living Saint and an Avatar of the God Emperor. In the Lore she goes toe to toe with Abaddon. Kills a Daemon Prince like it’s nothing. Who in the Gathering Storm is depicted as a central figure. Despite that, she basically is your Canoness with jump pack in terms of statline. Cute number of attacks and damage with a neat ability to bring back one or two models. Completely goes against the depiction of the character in lore and would easily be chewed up by a Chaos Lord never mind a Daemon Prince. That’s a clear example of applying a faction power tier system even when it contradicts the lore. Generic Chaos Lord should not have a vastly better profile than Celestine (Canoness with jump pack).
bullyboy wrote: Sisters are going to be S and T 3 with 3+ armour and BS3. That is between a marine and a guardsman, not much to play with there.
If they’re not going to be a horde army, then “miracles” and “faith” abilities need to go a lot further. Sister meltas need to have a way to increase the ability to wound a target more frequently . Flamers need to hit harder. Even their bolters should have an ability to be boosted for more AP. The army shouldn’t be a blunt instrument, but require synergy with characters to improve their efficiency. There should also be more defensive buffs.
We already had the edition where special rules to compensate for the profile and points being bad. What should have happened is that like Shock Assault and Bolter discipline being brought into the profile Sisters should have got their profile boosted.
For me there’s two options:
1) Your normal sister of battle gets WS3 plus, 2 attacks and 2 wounds. No change in points.
So those extra points for the Intercessor get you your strength, toughness and the better gun. You’re even still rocking an extra attack over the Sister. The extra wound, exactly in line with Terminator and Aggressor armour is because they are wearing armour. I don’t think that does anything to break the game and they’d still be dying to D2 guns. But it means ten sisters are actually a reasonable amount of wounds and attacks.
2) They become 7 points per model and you can take them in blocks of 20. I do not care if they die at that point.
Now I think option 1 is by far the most consistent with lore. They are the marine lite faction and it just reflects that what a marine is has changed since 3rd edition and the Sisters profile should reflect this inflation.
Like I’d much rather see the profile and points change around durability than something silly like giving every Sister devastating hits to represent mini acts of faith or something like that.
No. No to both of these. Sister are not Lite Marines. They are Elite Humans. And their stat block covers that, mostly. However, their points values do not.
I can easily look at a Battle Sister Squad next to a Tactical Squad and see that 10 BBS Sisters are really close to 5 Tactical Marines. The problem is that 10 Battle Sisters 110 points while 10 Tactical Marines are 175 points. Those Sisters either need their Statblock improved or their points dropped to around 90 points. Not, I'm a Marine with S 3 and T 3 improved, but improved in a way that makes sense for the points values.
For example, Sisters are renowned for the Holy Trinity of Bolter, Melta, and Flamer. However only the Storm Bolter and Flamers have better than standard rules. Buff the other Bolters and all the Meltas to reflect how good the Sisters are with their chosen weapons.
Give them back some limited Psychic Defense. A 6+ FNP against Psychic Mortal Wounds would be great, but I guess that would clog up the datasheets.
I think buffing Melta is the way to go to make sisters feel better. Would the Melta rules be better if rather then apply to damage the melta rule buffed the strength of the attack in close? so at range of 9 a Multi Melta was 2 Str 11 d6 damage attacks, instead of 2 str 9 d6+2 attacks?
Pretty sure that math's out to be basically identical. Also, trying to improve melta by improving the 9" melta range bonus is definitely going in the wrong direction. Sisters of Battle are never going to survive long enough to get that close.
The problem with the army right now is not actually anti-tank. The complete lack of Anti-tank is the symptom of the larger problem of this Index which is: None of the datasheets actually DO anything.
Hallowed Martyrs isn't totally defunct, but it's definitely in the bottom third of all army abilities.
Sacresants, Dominions, Battle Sister Squads, and Novitiates could have no guns and no CQC weapons and honestly wouldn't function much differently. They exist to sit on objectives and hopefully be annoying to remove.
Most of the Buff Characters just aren't worth it. Their combat stats are awful, their buffs don't really line up with the units they can attach too and even when they do, a percentage increase on a bad unit is always going to be meager.
Retributors, Castigators, Exorcists, Repentia, Immolators, and ArcoFlags have the POTENTIAL to do damage, but all have some glaring flaw that makes then dogwater in practice (No AP, not enough shots, Overpriced, weak to overwatch, hits on 4s, wounds on 5s, mid or bad special rules.)
Zephyrim and Paragons rely on their associated special character to be worth the plastic they're printed on, which means you're pretty much locked to one unit of each.
Exorcists, Penitent Engines, and Mortifiers are all decent at their jobs but A. They're overpriced (especially after the indirect fire nerfs.) and B. Pengines and Mortifiers are victory point pinatas thanks to bring it down.
The only unit I would say is objectively very good are Seraphim, and even they could drop 10-20pts.
I think they might play around with one or more of the USR like sustained hits or lethal hits as they synergise with the AoF rule. I think that’s what they’ll do but IMO it won’t address the durability issue.
Like one of their Sacred Rites was essentially Sustained Hits. There’s no reason they couldn’t have put that on the profile. Clearly there was a memo saying the armies damage output needed to go down. This has over corrected and has ignored that Sisters armies were relying on “I kill you before you shoot or hit me back so durability less important”. Bringing back attrition by dropping DPS suddenly makes that lack of staying power matter because you can’t work around it.
I’ll put this another way. Ignoring WS and S. An intercessor has 3 attacks. That is triple the attacks of a battle sister. Yet that Sister is near enough 2/3 the cost. They’re absurdly outclassed by marines.
Totalwar1402 wrote: I’ll put this another way. Ignoring WS and S. An intercessor has 3 attacks. That is triple the attacks of a battle sister. Yet that Sister is near enough 2/3 the cost. They’re absurdly outclassed by marines.
No disagreement on this, however 5 Intercessors are nearly as expensive as 10 Battle Sisters (95 to 110 points). 5 Intercessors being able to outfight 10 Battle Sisters isn't a problem if the BS shooting was enough to outshoot the Intercessors and they were a bit closer to the same cost.
And I have no problem with that. Sisters have never been able to outfight Marines, even in 3.5/4th when Sisters were 11 points and Marines were 13-15ish. We had been able to outshoot Marines on an even points basis, but I don't think so today. We need that back.
Why, they are supposed to be comicbook peak human style aka actually superhuman Faith witches according to the lore, and would be actually between guardsmen and Space Marines(which was the whole point of Sisters) with that simple change?
BrianDavion wrote: I think buffing Melta is the way to go to make sisters feel better. Would the Melta rules be better if rather then apply to damage the melta rule buffed the strength of the attack in close? so at range of 9 a Multi Melta was 2 Str 11 d6 damage attacks, instead of 2 str 9 d6+2 attacks?
That wouldn't even fix the Multi-Melta, much less the whole Melta-profile, and the least the Sisters army(especially not now after GW's attempt to change Sisters from blatantly bad to hot garbage).
gunchar wrote: Why, they are supposed to be comicbook peak human style aka actually superhuman Faith witches according to the lore, and would be actually between guardsmen and Space Marines(which was the whole point of Sisters) with that simple change?
They're not gene-crafted super-humans. Marines getting 2 wounds to separate them from the "chaff" of humanity makes far more sense than Sisters getting it.
Sisters at W2 feels wrong, they are basic humans with above average equipment. Their superiority should be represented by a better save, better weaponry and miracles, possibly by an easily accessible FNP. It's just a matter of enabling and pricing that package accordingly.
gunchar wrote: Why, they are supposed to be comicbook peak human style aka actually superhuman Faith witches according to the lore, and would be actually between guardsmen and Space Marines(which was the whole point of Sisters) with that simple change?
They're not gene-crafted super-humans. Marines getting 2 wounds to separate them from the "chaff" of humanity makes far more sense than Sisters getting it.
Exactly. This is also the problem with comparing them to Intercessors. SM got their stats buffed to differentiate them from the various baseline humans around. If you then buff Sisters as well, you're essentially just inflating stats, not differentiating them.
I think something for Sisters that utilises the Holy Trinity of weapons is the way to go, but it would have to be something that's always "on" not from a strat and ideally not tied to being led by a specific character. If you had something that applied to all the power-armoured Sisters units that represented that it would go a long way to making them unique and solving their current problems.
These are rgular humans why would thy have t4 2 wounds? And if thy got that then what should skitarii have? As they are actual cyborgs? What about orks? If sister went 2 wounds almost everything else would need to also.
Boosykes wrote: These are rgular humans why would thy have t4 2 wounds? And if thy got that then what should skitarii have? As they are actual cyborgs? What about orks? If sister went 2 wounds almost everything else would need to also.
To be fair (and I'm not accusing you in this thread in particular) - when I pointed out and complained about the total lack of verisimilitude of having Abaddon at T5 and Guilliman at T9, I was shouted down and told "they're all just levers to pull!"
So IDK... if Abaddon and an Ork Boy can be equally tough, and Genestealers can have 2Ws (which is weird and only for lever-pulling purposes), then Sisters can also deviate from their long-held statline for balance purposes. The genie is out of the bottle.
Gene St. Ealer wrote: To be fair (and I'm not accusing you in this thread in particular) - when I pointed out and complained about the total lack of verisimilitude of having Abaddon at T5 and Guilliman at T9, I was shouted down and told "they're all just levers to pull!"
So IDK... if Abaddon and an Ork Boy can be equally tough, and Genestealers can have 2Ws (which is weird and only for lever-pulling purposes), then Sisters can also deviate from their long-held statline for balance purposes. The genie is out of the bottle.
Abby and Roboute shouldn't be the same durability. Now, should Abby be tougher to some extent? Absolutely. Should he be T9? Absolutely not.
Gene St. Ealer wrote: To be fair (and I'm not accusing you in this thread in particular) - when I pointed out and complained about the total lack of verisimilitude of having Abaddon at T5 and Guilliman at T9, I was shouted down and told "they're all just levers to pull!"
So IDK... if Abaddon and an Ork Boy can be equally tough, and Genestealers can have 2Ws (which is weird and only for lever-pulling purposes), then Sisters can also deviate from their long-held statline for balance purposes. The genie is out of the bottle.
Single model units need higher toughness to be able to survive a game where no rules prevent you from shooting them straight away. That's why the shirtless beastboss on squigosaur is T10 while Ghazgkhull Thrakka is T6.
It's not Abaddon whose toughness is too low, Gulliman merely has an artificially inflated toughness so it actually takes more effort to kill him than a few suicidal meltas or a single plane, there is no fluff reasoning behind it.
Gene St. Ealer wrote: To be fair (and I'm not accusing you in this thread in particular) - when I pointed out and complained about the total lack of verisimilitude of having Abaddon at T5 and Guilliman at T9, I was shouted down and told "they're all just levers to pull!"
So IDK... if Abaddon and an Ork Boy can be equally tough, and Genestealers can have 2Ws (which is weird and only for lever-pulling purposes), then Sisters can also deviate from their long-held statline for balance purposes. The genie is out of the bottle.
Single model units need higher toughness to be able to survive a game where no rules prevent you from shooting them straight away. That's why the shirtless beastboss on squigosaur is T10 while Ghazgkhull Thrakka is T6.
It's not Abaddon whose toughness is too low, Gulliman merely has an artificially inflated toughness so it actually takes more effort to kill him than a few suicidal meltas or a single plane, there is no fluff reasoning behind it.
Right, so the paradigm is that if Sisters need to be 2W for balance reasons, so be it. Of course, I agree that this would cause all sorts of other cascading issues, but that's a separate topic.
they probably shouldn't be 2W, but rather for what a sister costs now, the SoB player should get like 1.5 sister or 1.75 sister.
That a multi meltas should have been anti vehicle +4. Even if they were suppose to be that only for SoB. Assuming mandatory 10 man squads, no extra bodies on retributors etc.
Gene St. Ealer wrote: Right, so the paradigm is that if Sisters need to be 2W for balance reasons, so be it. Of course, I agree that this would cause all sorts of other cascading issues, but that's a separate topic.
Not really, the paradigm is that Abaddon and Thrakka feel sufficiently durable with their relatively low toughess as part of a bodyguard units, while squigboss, daemon princes and loyalist primarchs do not.
An extra wound would change their interaction with the game to something completely different. T4 sisters with some other durability ability like FNP or an invul added on top? Sure, why not.
Dedicated anti-infantry weapons being inefficient at killing them and overcharging plasma to kill a basic sister? Nope.
Maybe give them an army wide shot/hit back on death? The way they are pointed and with the weapon load outs they have, it wouldn't be too powerful. comparing to lets say GSC respawning whole armies.
gunchar wrote: Why, they are supposed to be comicbook peak human style aka actually superhuman Faith witches according to the lore, and would be actually between guardsmen and Space Marines(which was the whole point of Sisters) with that simple change?
They're not gene-crafted super-humans.
Right, they're natural comicbook peak human styled superhuman with magic in Power Armor.
H.B.M.C. wrote: Marines getting 2 wounds to separate them from the "chaff" of humanity makes far more sense than Sisters getting it.
Why, if you can actually go through the Power Armor and hit a lethal point of the Space Marine inside it should kill him(except maybe you very specifiically just hit one of the hearts, ignoring how little sense that whole concept actually makes) just like it kills a Sister, did i miss that they have Wolverine style regeneration or why exactly should it make any sense that you pretty much need to kill a Space Marine twice?
It makes actually sense that Space Marines have higher toughness and strength, but pretty much giving them two lives is just an arbitrary gameplay mechanic to better seperate them from the "chaff" of humanity, one they could also use to better seperate Sisters from the "chaff" off humanity and have less trouble with balancing them as a step in-between guardsmen and Space Marines.
Boosykes wrote: These are rgular humans why would thy have t4
Who talked about T4?
Boosykes wrote: These are rgular humans why would thy have 2 wounds?
Cause they're in the lore almost as much "regular humans" as Batman is, which also didn't stop him from dodging bullets and kicking trees in half for example, hell there is with Sly Marbo even someone in the lore who shows that being a "regular human" has absolutely no meaning at all(and i'm not even talking about straight up superhero Sisters like Ephrael Stern here, Mark of Faith for example shows that you need to go through superhuman lvl training even without Power Armor to become a Sister in the first place). And more importantly, cause the 2 wounds are unlike the toughness just an arbitrary gameplay mechanic anyway.
Boosykes wrote: And if thy got that then what should skitarii have? As they are actual cyborgs?
You do realize that Sororitas Power Armor also aren't just decoration, right?
They are a horde army, while Sisters are clearly not.
Boosykes wrote: If sister went 2 wounds almost everything else would need to also.
Based on?
But just to be clear here, giving the normal infantry units 2 wounds wouldn't actually fix 10th Edition Sisters right now, i just strongly disagree with the idea that it would be any more logical(it's anyways a good rule of thumb that almost nothing regarding Space Marines is actually based on logic) that Space Marine have somehow pretty much two lives.
You guys can argue all you want, but the above isn’t changing.
3+ armour save is still decent, but 6+ invuln is practically worthless in a less AP environment. Never going to come up with weapons that are targeting sisters. That needs to be changed to 6+ FNP army wide. Now if there are other models/characters that interacts with this mechanic, change them too.
Remember that 9th edition intro video? Her faith didn’t stop the necron weapon wounding her, it allowed her to heal the wound (I know fluff vs rules). Still, a FNP fits better than an invuln.
Because giving them an extra attack and wound (plus a usable WS for normal sisters squads) isn’t that big a deal. They’d still be a lot worse than any marine units. I mean the old Celestians before they got randomly scrapped had the WS and Attacks for a few extra points and that did not break the game. Nobody called foul over Sisters having 2 attacks and WS3 plus then.
Let me put this another way.
Should Sisters of Battle be able to kill Genestealer Cultists or Chaos Cultists in close combat?
Bearing in mind how they’re wrote about in lore and in CGI trailers where they’re curb stomping Necrons. A single attack model that hits on 4 plus and cannot wound anything is a terrible unit. Not power armoured shock troops who should be killing, you know, actual “chaff” which you can auto-regenerate apparently. If you can’t kill your opponents free units that’s a problem.
Like, if ten Sisters of Battle charge a Genecult Neophtye squad, that squad should be utterly outclassed and wiped out. It shouldn’t be a case that “ohh well half my attacks will miss and then half fail to wound so I am just chipping away at them; I’ll just hang back for my turn to shoot.” Yeah, best equipment the Imperium has to offer…
That’s why the profile needs to be looked at. Because marines have went up other armies are having their profiles boosted to compensate like Orks being able to ignore two out of three bolt shells that hit them. Again, they should never have let damage run away and should have dropped those profiles for those armies. But until they do that the Sisters profile doesn’t reflect the army.
I cannot begin to describe how much the statline of the basic battle sister doesn't matter.
The issue with the army is, as I've stated before, that NONE OF THE UNITS DO ANYTHING.
Dominions, Retributors, and Sacresants basically don't have a datasheet rule. Dominions reroll advances is completely pointless, especially in an army that has miracle dice. Retributors reroll 1s to wound is generally negated by the buffs you give them (unlimited 6s/Immolator rerolls), and Sacresants -1 to wound requires you to take either a Canoness, who is the worst character to combine them with, or Junith Eruita, who immediately locks the squad into being backline objective camping.
If Dominions had Sustained hits 1, that would at least make 2 of their builds more useful. Especially combine with the Palatines Lethal Hits. Flamers would still be bad, but those have always been bad.
Retributors, I think you give Reroll hits of 1/Reroll # of shots. If they can't take a canoness, you can't have BOTH rolls require miracle dice to have a reasonable number of successes. Reroll shots is just for parity.
Sacresants: Improve both weapons AP by 1, make them a 2+ save. Make them -1 to wound regardless of the characters attached, let them double up with a Canoness+Support character.
Novitiates don't have enough attacks to be a melee horde killer, and all of their upgrades force you to give up what little melee they have. Their datasheet rule also conflicts with their best character buff (missionary). I think you give them reroll 1s to wound (no full rerolls) and +1 attack for characters with the sword. They're slightly less good with a palatine but should be extremely strong with a missionary.
Castigator: Make the battlecannon AP-2 so it's at least somewhat better at killing tough targets than the autocannon is.
Repentia: Either let me attach a preacher or make them a bit cheaper.
Zephyrim, I'd like to see either sustained hits added to the sword, or an extra point of AP. Or a price drop. They're pretty close to where they need to be.
Paragons: People get confused by Paragons because they think they're sisters dreadnoughts. They're not, they're sisters terminators. Price them closer to THAT.
Finally, change Hallowed Martyrs so that you get the +1 to wound bonus AT or below half of starting strength.
Totalwar1402 wrote: Because giving them an extra attack and wound (plus a usable WS for normal sisters squads) isn’t that big a deal. They’d still be a lot worse than any marine units. I mean the old Celestians before they got randomly scrapped had the WS and Attacks for a few extra points and that did not break the game. Nobody called foul over Sisters having 2 attacks and WS3 plus then.
Let me put this another way.
Should Sisters of Battle be able to kill Genestealer Cultists or Chaos Cultists in close combat?
Bearing in mind how they’re wrote about in lore and in CGI trailers where they’re curb stomping Necrons. A single attack model that hits on 4 plus and cannot wound anything is a terrible unit. Not power armoured shock troops who should be killing, you know, actual “chaff” which you can auto-regenerate apparently. If you can’t kill your opponents free units that’s a problem.
Like, if ten Sisters of Battle charge a Genecult Neophtye squad, that squad should be utterly outclassed and wiped out. It shouldn’t be a case that “ohh well half my attacks will miss and then half fail to wound so I am just chipping away at them; I’ll just hang back for my turn to shoot.” Yeah, best equipment the Imperium has to offer…
That’s why the profile needs to be looked at. Because marines have went up other armies are having their profiles boosted to compensate like Orks being able to ignore two out of three bolt shells that hit them. Again, they should never have let damage run away and should have dropped those profiles for those armies. But until they do that the Sisters profile doesn’t reflect the army.
To be blunt, Necron Warriors have been devalued so much compared to other factions' basic troopers it's sad. They should be the equal of Astartes; the fact that they're not is just marine spank to the nth degree.
Sororitas used to have T4 in previous editions, though, that I could see making a comeback.
Single model units need higher toughness to be able to survive a game where no rules prevent you from shooting them straight away. That's why the shirtless beastboss on squigosaur is T10 while Ghazgkhull Thrakka is T6.
It's not Abaddon whose toughness is too low, Gulliman merely has an artificially inflated toughness so it actually takes more effort to kill him than a few suicidal meltas or a single plane, there is no fluff reasoning behind it.
Primarchs are consistently written to be able to kill greater daemons and other equivalent monsters, and even using just their own physical strength and toughness. Fulgrim has shattered the neck of an Avatar of Khaine, Sanguinius has snapped the spine of a Bloodthirster over his knee after surviving its heavy axe swings.
If anything T9 undersells the toughness of a primarch.
To be blunt, Necron Warriors have been devalued so much compared to other factions' basic troopers it's sad. They should be the equal of Astartes; the fact that they're not is just marine spank to the nth degree.
There are more Necron Warriors in a single Tomb World than there are Astartes in the galaxy.
They're a beefy chaff unit, like Orks but better-equipped. They have always been portrayed as a silver tide that outnumbers Marines in any given battlefield.
Please continue whining about Marines in every post though.
To be blunt, Necron Warriors have been devalued so much compared to other factions' basic troopers it's sad. They should be the equal of Astartes; the fact that they're not is just marine spank to the nth degree.
There are more Necron Warriors in a single Tomb World than there are Astartes in the galaxy.
They're a beefy chaff unit, like Orks but better-equipped. They have always been portrayed as a silver tide that outnumbers Marines in any given battlefield.
Please continue whining about Marines in every post though.
They certainly weren't portrayed that way in 2e.
Either in lore or pts%mechanics.
To be blunt, Necron Warriors have been devalued so much compared to other factions' basic troopers it's sad. They should be the equal of Astartes; the fact that they're not is just marine spank to the nth degree.
There are more Necron Warriors in a single Tomb World than there are Astartes in the galaxy.
They're a beefy chaff unit, like Orks but better-equipped. They have always been portrayed as a silver tide that outnumbers Marines in any given battlefield.
Please continue whining about Marines in every post though.
They certainly weren't portrayed that way in 2e.
Either in lore or pts%mechanics.
Exactly. Also, there are more Leman Russ tanks than there are Astartes in the galaxy. Quality is not inversely correlated with quality.
But yeah, I'd be ok with T4 sororitas. If orks can be t5 they can be t4.
Gene St. Ealer wrote: Right, so the paradigm is that if Sisters need to be 2W for balance reasons, so be it. Of course, I agree that this would cause all sorts of other cascading issues, but that's a separate topic.
Not really, the paradigm is that Abaddon and Thrakka feel sufficiently durable with their relatively low toughess as part of a bodyguard units, while squigboss, daemon princes and loyalist primarchs do not.
An extra wound would change their interaction with the game to something completely different. T4 sisters with some other durability ability like FNP or an invul added on top? Sure, why not.
Dedicated anti-infantry weapons being inefficient at killing them and overcharging plasma to kill a basic sister? Nope.
I actually like the idea of FNP Sisters - the light of the Emperor saving them from certain doom type stuff.
ccs wrote: They certainly weren't portrayed that way in 2e. Either in lore or pts%mechanics.
Ok, and? Necron Warriors have existed in their current state for longer than they were ever what they were in 2nd Ed. It'd be like getting annoyed because Marines aren't T3 ex-criminals anymore like they were back in the RT days.
They certainly weren't portrayed that way in 2e.
Either in lore or pts%mechanics.
Can you show me a single piece of lore that shows Necrons not massively outnumbering Marines on the battlefield?
I don't give a single gak about points and gameplay by the way. The Necrons of old were simply pointed and statted wrong. The current portrayal is far closer to lore accurate.
Exactly. Also, there are more Leman Russ tanks than there are Astartes in the galaxy. Quality is not inversely correlated with quality.
But yeah, I'd be ok with T4 sororitas. If orks can be t5 they can be t4.
Kind of an idiotic comparison given that a Leman Russ is a big fatass tank that is only good for being a big fatass tank. Can it teleport or drop pod into the enemy command center and decapitate the enemy command and then bounce out with no problems? Because if Necron Warriors were actually as good as Marines or better then the Necrons, having access to arguably the best teleportation technology in the entire setting, would be able to leverage the trillions of Space Marine equivalents they have access to to conquer the entire galaxy.
Only they don't do any of that gak. They're a slow lumbering horde of reanimating goons who walk forward and shoot and get mowed down by the hundreds by Marines.
If you are not Custodes, Knights, or CSM your line troops are inferior to Marines man for man. I'm sorry if this upsets anyone.
I think the area to focus on Sisters is their offensive profiles with maybe slight tweaks to defense. A 3+ Save is very rare amongst regular humans and most Sisters units have some sort of Invulnerable Save. FNP against Psychic Mortal Wounds would give us back our historic weak but present defense against Psychic Powers. But it is on the offense side that Sisters have been falling farther and farther behind Astartes.
Close Combat: Astartes and Sisters used to both have 1 Attack in Melee. Astartes now have 3, we lost the dubious enhanced CC Celestian Squad, and Celestian Sacresants have only 2 attacks. Strange given that Seraphim have 2 attacks and Zephyrim have 3? I think bumping up the Battle Sister Squad and most characters 1 attack wouldn't be out of order.
Ranged Combat: Need to focus on making the Sisters bread and butter weapons effective if they are going to do something other than dwell at the bottom of the rankings. Otherwise, they will end up shying away from their traditional units in favor of those that work. My thoughts.
Boltgun/Heavy Bolter: These need some addition to make them better than the stock variants that other Imperial Factions use. Extra damage like the Storm Bolter would be a bit much, but an extra pip of Strength would be rather nice on these for use against Infantry targets.
Meltas: Some extra boost her would be nice also. Most game changing would be extra range, but higher Melta rating wouldn't hurt the effectiveness either.
Flamers: As these already better than stock variants, asking for more would be greedy.
I actually like the idea of FNP Sisters - the light of the Emperor saving them from certain doom type stuff.
My take on this is that it would involve a lot more rolling and drag the game on. At a certain point, if an additional point of toughness or an extra would *effectively* equals a 6+ FNP, why not save us all the time and trouble and go that route instead of making players roll an extra dice on all wounds to save, what, like an extra two models per squad?
What I find somewhat frustrating is that a lot of people latch onto the stats and back them up with lore, without considering that, at some point, something has to give to make the *game* more enjoyable.
GW used to do this--power armor=3+ save. Cool. Humans=T3. Cool. Things tougher than humans=T4. Something strong enough to breach power armor and overcome T4? Then it's strong enough to gak your average marine troop--which is a tradeoff you have to give to run what should be an 'elite' army as pretty much whatever style it feels like. Then GW jacked up the lethality and everyone started complaining about how their super special marines didn't feel super special enough, so voila, W2 baseline infantry.
Which is fine. It doesn't make much sense that Marines get it when other armies don't (like necrons, lore wise, being able to still function with half their body missing, or daemons not even having an anatomy, or even gaunts whose internal structure is basically a bag of good with redundant structures and cellular activity), but it's an arbitrary gameplay number, and there wouldn't be much issue if everyone else either got similar treatment or were pointed better. Problem is, those marines are either cheaper or way better point for point than what Sisters can do. Which feels like a kick in the dick.
ccs wrote: They certainly weren't portrayed that way in 2e.
Either in lore or pts%mechanics.
Ok, and? Necron Warriors have existed in their current state for longer than they were ever what they were in 2nd Ed. It'd be like getting annoyed because Marines aren't T3 ex-criminals anymore like they were back in the RT days.
And 2nd Ed ended almost 25 years ago.
Well the claim was always. Being true for 23 out of 26 years is not "always".
Single model units need higher toughness to be able to survive a game where no rules prevent you from shooting them straight away. That's why the shirtless beastboss on squigosaur is T10 while Ghazgkhull Thrakka is T6.
It's not Abaddon whose toughness is too low, Gulliman merely has an artificially inflated toughness so it actually takes more effort to kill him than a few suicidal meltas or a single plane, there is no fluff reasoning behind it.
Primarchs are consistently written to be able to kill greater daemons and other equivalent monsters, and even using just their own physical strength and toughness. Fulgrim has shattered the neck of an Avatar of Khaine, Sanguinius has snapped the spine of a Bloodthirster over his knee after surviving its heavy axe swings.
Angron has recently killed a planet and defeated an entire crusade fleet by swinging his sword once while jumping through space. I think that he should have a rule representing this that automatically places you in first place of any tournament or league you are playing in while also forcing all present imperial players to shelf their army and be forced to play a chaos army for the rest of the edition if you roll six sixes for his attacks.
The trouble with making the basic sisters profile stronger is then they just end up closer in cost to the marines - and there goes the points difference with it, so you just end up with underequipped firstborn.
The marines 'oath of the moment' is what could have been. A powerful but localised, opportunistic swing off the odds in your favour, allowing a weaker faction to become the stronger faction at key moments.
At Erjak,
The Palatine can also join Sacresants, triggering their rule and is probably the best option IMHO. Lethal hits in combat plus her own personal MW output (which ain’t great but is something).
I do agree with your other points (weird World we are living in) that the data sheets just don’t work. They need a significant rework which unfortunately isn’t going to happen until a new codex, so more than likely all we can truly expect is points adjustments.
They certainly weren't portrayed that way in 2e.
Either in lore or pts%mechanics.
Can you show me a single piece of lore that shows Necrons not massively outnumbering Marines on the battlefield?
I don't give a single gak about points and gameplay by the way. The Necrons of old were simply pointed and statted wrong. The current portrayal is far closer to lore accurate.
Exactly. Also, there are more Leman Russ tanks than there are Astartes in the galaxy. Quality is not inversely correlated with quality.
But yeah, I'd be ok with T4 sororitas. If orks can be t5 they can be t4.
Kind of an idiotic comparison given that a Leman Russ is a big fatass tank that is only good for being a big fatass tank. Can it teleport or drop pod into the enemy command center and decapitate the enemy command and then bounce out with no problems? Because if Necron Warriors were actually as good as Marines or better then the Necrons, having access to arguably the best teleportation technology in the entire setting, would be able to leverage the trillions of Space Marine equivalents they have access to to conquer the entire galaxy.
Only they don't do any of that gak. They're a slow lumbering horde of reanimating goons who walk forward and shoot and get mowed down by the hundreds by Marines.
If you are not Custodes, Knights, or CSM your line troops are inferior to Marines man for man. I'm sorry if this upsets anyone.
It's not at all upsetting it's more silly than anything. Litteral terminator robots or dudes in ceramic armor. Accent robot people with the most advanced ed tech in the setting litteraly millions of years old or some roided out human.
Look I like marines as much as the next guy they are cool. But frankly their lore is a little embarising when compared to other factions in the setting. Muscle will never outdo sufficiently advanced machine this has been proven a million times over.
So ya sci fi setting and all but frankly necrons should probably be way stronger with better guns than marines and since they are millions of years old (a number humans can't comprehend, look at any civilization today most are a few hundred years old) they should be balanced by being very few in number.
So sure marine spank all around I will join you sometimes but ya suspension Of disbelief is a little hard when marine lore starts to get carried away.
Makes for a good story when marines show up and save the day from mellenials old robot horrers but if this were even close to reality marines would get wrecked. You got dudes with 2 hearts or litteral undying robots.
They certainly weren't portrayed that way in 2e.
Either in lore or pts%mechanics.
Can you show me a single piece of lore that shows Necrons not massively outnumbering Marines on the battlefield?
I don't give a single gak about points and gameplay by the way. The Necrons of old were simply pointed and statted wrong. The current portrayal is far closer to lore accurate.
Exactly. Also, there are more Leman Russ tanks than there are Astartes in the galaxy. Quality is not inversely correlated with quality.
But yeah, I'd be ok with T4 sororitas. If orks can be t5 they can be t4.
Kind of an idiotic comparison given that a Leman Russ is a big fatass tank that is only good for being a big fatass tank. Can it teleport or drop pod into the enemy command center and decapitate the enemy command and then bounce out with no problems? Because if Necron Warriors were actually as good as Marines or better then the Necrons, having access to arguably the best teleportation technology in the entire setting, would be able to leverage the trillions of Space Marine equivalents they have access to to conquer the entire galaxy.
Only they don't do any of that gak. They're a slow lumbering horde of reanimating goons who walk forward and shoot and get mowed down by the hundreds by Marines.
If you are not Custodes, Knights, or CSM your line troops are inferior to Marines man for man. I'm sorry if this upsets anyone.
It's not at all upsetting it's more silly than anything. Litteral terminator robots or dudes in ceramic armor. Accent robot people with the most advanced ed tech in the setting litteraly millions of years old or some roided out human.
Look I like marines as much as the next guy they are cool. But frankly their lore is a little embarising when compared to other factions in the setting. Muscle will never outdo sufficiently advanced machine this has been proven a million times over.
So ya sci fi setting and all but frankly necrons should probably be way stronger with better guns than marines and since they are millions of years old (a number humans can't comprehend, look at any civilization today most are a few hundred years old) they should be balanced by being very few in number.
So sure marine spank all around I will join you sometimes but ya suspension Of disbelief is a little hard when marine lore starts to get carried away.
Makes for a good story when marines show up and save the day from mellenials old robot horrers but if this were even close to reality marines would get wrecked. You got dudes with 2 hearts or litteral undying robots.
Undying robots also got worse guns than whatever the Eldar fanboys got. Eldar fanspank is far worse.
Boosykes wrote: It's not at all upsetting it's more silly than anything. Litteral terminator robots or dudes in ceramic armor. Accent robot people with the most advanced ed tech in the setting litteraly millions of years old or some roided out human.
This is more of a style over substance argument, I'm afraid.
Nothing says that just because you have the greatest tech around that you also don't give a gak about your chaff and they get the crap bodies with the lowest (relative) survival rate, whereas you, being a noble Necron, get the best of the best.
Honestly, SoB seem to be really suffering from the fact that so many of the standard/traditional weapons are utter trash in 10th.
Bolters have been pitiful ever since Marines gorged themselves silly and doubled in wounds.
Flamers have been arse for the last 3 editions because 1d6 hits with no AP is simply not impressive.
And now 10th has decided that the classic anti-vehicle weapon needs to be trash against vehicles.
It's not at all upsetting it's more silly than anything. Litteral terminator robots or dudes in ceramic armor. Accent robot people with the most advanced ed tech in the setting litteraly millions of years old or some roided out human.
Look I like marines as much as the next guy they are cool. But frankly their lore is a little embarising when compared to other factions in the setting. Muscle will never outdo sufficiently advanced machine this has been proven a million times over.
On a related point, I've never been all that interested in the ever more ridiculous power fantasy of Marines.
Being super-humans is fine but I liked when they were still weaker than a lot of enemies. Not just enemies like Hive Tyrants but even many troops and such. It meant they still had to rely heavily on better tactics and such, rather than brute strength.
It also made them feel a bit more heroic because the odds weren't so much in their favour. I doubt Iron Man would look as heroic if he put on a billion-dollar super-suit to blow up angry kittens.
As it stands, I just don't see the appeal when Space Marines are surrounded by plot armour made of the author's own drool.
vipoid wrote: Honestly, SoB seem to be really suffering from the fact that so many of the standard/traditional weapons are utter trash in 10th.
Bolters have been pitiful ever since Marines gorged themselves silly and doubled in wounds.
Flamers have been arse for the last 3 editions because 1d6 hits with no AP is simply not impressive.
And now 10th has decided that the classic anti-vehicle weapon needs to be trash against vehicles.
Not sure that's the issue. Any more than "T3 3+ can't possibly work, ignore all the worse stat lines in the game that can work". I think the problem is SoB evolved into a stabby army (preferably Bloody Rose) but are now in an edition which has nerfed stabbing. Especially "light stabbing" - as we see with DE. But they have nothing else points efficient to fall back on.
I don't think assault is the way to go - but Drazar+Incubi or Lelith+Wyches serve as missiles that count if they land. Celestians by contrast just seem too pillowfisted to matter. I feel Repentia with all the rerolls aren't awful - but just having 3 attacks base would move them up in the world. You just can't have assault units which are so-so into marines and then trash into anything further up the food chain - especially if they just die if anything serious looks at them.
At the very least any unit which can take a Canoness or Palatine should be able to take one of the smaller buffing characters rather than just the regular Sisters squad. The Palatine should be able to sacrifice say 3 miracle dice to give her whole squad the mortal wound bonus. (Maybe this would be too good, not bothered to math it out.)
They certainly weren't portrayed that way in 2e.
Either in lore or pts%mechanics.
Can you show me a single piece of lore that shows Necrons not massively outnumbering Marines on the battlefield?
I don't give a single gak about points and gameplay by the way. The Necrons of old were simply pointed and statted wrong. The current portrayal is far closer to lore accurate.
Exactly. Also, there are more Leman Russ tanks than there are Astartes in the galaxy. Quality is not inversely correlated with quality.
But yeah, I'd be ok with T4 sororitas. If orks can be t5 they can be t4.
Kind of an idiotic comparison given that a Leman Russ is a big fatass tank that is only good for being a big fatass tank. Can it teleport or drop pod into the enemy command center and decapitate the enemy command and then bounce out with no problems? Because if Necron Warriors were actually as good as Marines or better then the Necrons, having access to arguably the best teleportation technology in the entire setting, would be able to leverage the trillions of Space Marine equivalents they have access to to conquer the entire galaxy.
Only they don't do any of that gak. They're a slow lumbering horde of reanimating goons who walk forward and shoot and get mowed down by the hundreds by Marines.
If you are not Custodes, Knights, or CSM your line troops are inferior to Marines man for man. I'm sorry if this upsets anyone.
It's not at all upsetting it's more silly than anything. Litteral terminator robots or dudes in ceramic armor. Accent robot people with the most advanced ed tech in the setting litteraly millions of years old or some roided out human.
Look I like marines as much as the next guy they are cool. But frankly their lore is a little embarising when compared to other factions in the setting. Muscle will never outdo sufficiently advanced machine this has been proven a million times over.
So ya sci fi setting and all but frankly necrons should probably be way stronger with better guns than marines and since they are millions of years old (a number humans can't comprehend, look at any civilization today most are a few hundred years old) they should be balanced by being very few in number.
So sure marine spank all around I will join you sometimes but ya suspension Of disbelief is a little hard when marine lore starts to get carried away.
Makes for a good story when marines show up and save the day from mellenials old robot horrers but if this were even close to reality marines would get wrecked. You got dudes with 2 hearts or litteral undying robots.
Yes Necron Warriors should have 8 toughness, 10 wounds, ressurection protocals worth a damn, and a 2+ armor save.
and then Necron players can complain their army is unplayable because a block of necron warriors costs as much as a bloody titan.
If you want a Necron troop that's as individually strong as a Space Marine the Immortals are very much just that so warriors being adjusted into chaffy CR 1/2 skeletons isn't that big of a deal
Personally, what I consider sisters needs is to focus more on the glass canon part.
-Make a holy trinity rule if they hit all the same unit target. CORE for the whole faction, and it makes their building more interesting rather than all melta or all flamer. Something like: +1 AP for bolters, +1 to wound for Melta, Flamer forces a Battle Shock.
-I feel most sisters need +1A in close combat. Perhaps not regular sisters, but most infantry roster definitely.
-Castigator battle cannon needs +1AP to deal better with high armor.
-Regarding survibility, no reason to give sisters 4T or 2W. Its nonsense really. But they could swap the invulnerable for FNP. Only reason against is that it slows games further.
-Celestine hit like a wet noodle. She should be able to cut Terminators in half and go toe to toe with Chaos Lords, but her dmg output is too low right now.
-MM and melta in general needs a Anti-Vehicle 4+.
I can see some point adjustments in sisters,... but honestly, I think the point adjustments shouldnt be done to her but to other armies. Space Marines should NOT be as cheap as they are for what they offer. If you want loreful elite marines, price them accordingly.
Guillérmidas wrote: Personally, what I consider sisters needs is to focus more on the glass canon part.
-Make a holy trinity rule if they hit all the same unit target. CORE for the whole faction, and it makes their building more interesting rather than all melta or all flamer. Something like: +1 AP for bolters, +1 to wound for Melta, Flamer forces a Battle Shock.
-I feel most sisters need +1A in close combat. Perhaps not regular sisters, but most infantry roster definitely.
-Castigator battle cannon needs +1AP to deal better with high armor.
-Regarding survibility, no reason to give sisters 4T or 2W. Its nonsense really. But they could swap the invulnerable for FNP. Only reason against is that it slows games further.
-Celestine hit like a wet noodle. She should be able to cut Terminators in half and go toe to toe with Chaos Lords, but her dmg output is too low right now.
-MM and melta in general needs a Anti-Vehicle 4+.
I can see some point adjustments in sisters,... but honestly, I think the point adjustments shouldnt be done to her but to other armies. Space Marines should NOT be as cheap as they are for what they offer. If you want loreful elite marines, price them accordingly.
Problem is, in a world of DW and Towering elite armies do not function. And I say this as someone whose army is pointed higher then marine for weaker efficiency, on all units.
Sure a basic marine can cost 25pts. But then marines will be where Votan are now, and all armies that are marine+, will have a 10% win rate down from 28%. The way to fix a bad army is not to make other armies bad too, bar extrem outliers like eldar at various moments of every edition.
ccs wrote: They certainly weren't portrayed that way in 2e.
Either in lore or pts%mechanics.
Ok, and? Necron Warriors have existed in their current state for longer than they were ever what they were in 2nd Ed. It'd be like getting annoyed because Marines aren't T3 ex-criminals anymore like they were back in the RT days.
And 2nd Ed ended almost 25 years ago.
But even in 3rd ed, through most of 5th, Necron Warriors were priced at 18 to a Marines 15, and were worth it. They held a position as 'greater than a marine' in raw stats and capability. Warriors got hit hard over the years since.
They certainly weren't portrayed that way in 2e.
Either in lore or pts%mechanics.
Can you show me a single piece of lore that shows Necrons not massively outnumbering Marines on the battlefield?
I don't give a single gak about points and gameplay by the way. The Necrons of old were simply pointed and statted wrong. The current portrayal is far closer to lore accurate.
Exactly. Also, there are more Leman Russ tanks than there are Astartes in the galaxy. Quality is not inversely correlated with quality.
But yeah, I'd be ok with T4 sororitas. If orks can be t5 they can be t4.
Kind of an idiotic comparison given that a Leman Russ is a big fatass tank that is only good for being a big fatass tank. Can it teleport or drop pod into the enemy command center and decapitate the enemy command and then bounce out with no problems? Because if Necron Warriors were actually as good as Marines or better then the Necrons, having access to arguably the best teleportation technology in the entire setting, would be able to leverage the trillions of Space Marine equivalents they have access to to conquer the entire galaxy.
Only they don't do any of that gak. They're a slow lumbering horde of reanimating goons who walk forward and shoot and get mowed down by the hundreds by Marines.
If you are not Custodes, Knights, or CSM your line troops are inferior to Marines man for man. I'm sorry if this upsets anyone.
What a silly argument. Tyranid Warriors say hi. And there are billions of them.
Also, Necrons could be better individually than Marines, with access to teleportation, and still not auto-win conflicts. Because in case you forget, the Imperium has numerous fighting forces other than the Marines, such as the Guard, the Navy, the Mechanicum, the Sororitas etc. Plus, the Necrons have their own alternate conflicts that require attention.
shortymcnostrill wrote: Why exactly are you guys repeating the necron vs marine power level argument in a sisters thread?
So necrons should have chaff points, be stronger then marines and have a heavy resurection theme? That would make them very uninteractive and unfun to play against, as we already seen in 9th ed, when they dominated an entire seson playing soliter.
Karol wrote: So necrons should have chaff points, be stronger then marines and have a heavy resurection theme? That would make them very uninteractive and unfun to play against, as we already seen in 9th ed, when they dominated an entire seson playing soliter.
Did you miss the part where a Warrior used to be 20% more expensive than a Marine?
yes. but they are not now. The paradigma now and which influances stuff like boxes/unit sized etc means that necron warriors are run in large numbers. GW is not suddenly going to go, oh lets make necron players buy fewer models for their armies.
But on a general point: from what I read and heard I also think GW did you pretty dirty. And it would be kind of cruel if Sisters would be put towards a horde playstyle as I agree this would feel pretty strange lore wise.
On the whole "Meltas suck vs. armor"/"we don't have real anti armor capability": what I could see working pretty good without getting into this whole "If SoB Meltas get buffed, than SM Meltas should get the same stats!" mess: The IG Leman Russ Exterminator has the interesting ability that if he hits something with his autocannons, everything else hitting that target gets +1 because lorewise it has already weakened the armor. I could see a similar ability for sisters with the explanation that they have learned extensively to focus their meltas on the same point. Just shooting from the hip: "If this unit hits an enemy with a melta weapon, every other melta firing at that unit gets another +1 S and +1 AP". Maybe even let that stack.
Of course one would have to try out if that is to weak or too strong (maybe +1 to wound works better), but the general idea should come across. Sisters focussing their meltas on something and every additional melta shot hits the same spot doing more and more damage.
Insectum7 wrote: What a silly argument. Tyranid Warriors say hi. And there are billions of them.
I wonder if you could provide a citation proving that there are billions of Tyranid Warriors? Or even that they are more formidable than Marines man per man.
They certainly didn't look particularly formidable when Titus ripped one's head off of its shoulders with nothing but his own brute strength in the Space Marine 2 trailer.
Also, Necrons could be better individually than Marines, with access to teleportation, and still not auto-win conflicts. Because in case you forget, the Imperium has numerous fighting forces other than the Marines, such as the Guard, the Navy, the Mechanicum, the Sororitas etc. Plus, the Necrons have their own alternate conflicts that require attention.
What does that have to do with anything? There are more Necron Warriors than all of those fighting forces combined with the probable exception of the Imperial Guard. And the Necrons' tech level (particularly their teleportation tech and ability to instantly reanimate/repair fallen soldiers) means that logistically they are far superior to pretty much every other race. A species with a basic line infantry superior to literally everyone but Custodes and Knights numbering in the trillions, with logistical support far outstripping everyone combined with the best technology in the setting would make them nearly unbeatable unless their leadership was so stupid and incompetent that they couldn't leverage this insurmountable advantage against their foes. And personally I'd rather their line troops be rather chaffy but with the faction's movers and shakers be competent and threatening than for them to be a bunch of dolts led by dolts.
No idea.
Because people like you can't help but respond to nine day old posts apparently.
On the whole "Meltas suck vs. armor"/"we don't have real anti armor capability": what I could see working pretty good without getting into this whole "If SoB Meltas get buffed, than SM Meltas should get the same stats!" mess:
Marine and Guard Melta DOES suck though. That Sisters are more reliant on it as their sole form of AT is from a potential failure in army design.
Insectum7 wrote: What a silly argument. Tyranid Warriors say hi. And there are billions of them.
I wonder if you could provide a citation proving that there are billions of Tyranid Warriors? Or even that they are more formidable than Marines man per man.
They certainly didn't look particularly formidable when Titus ripped one's head off of its shoulders with nothing but his own brute strength in the Space Marine 2 trailer.
Warriors have been more powerful than marines since their introduction, and they're the "without numbers" faction. You'd have a point if we were discussing hive tyrants, probably, but warriors should ridiculously outnumber marines (especially if you adhere to the 1000 marines per chapter fluff). Which is fine, as most if the imperium's might comes from the guard anyway.
Marines are powerful *for human standards*. They don't have to be the best anyone else has to offer. They're not even the best humanity has to offer. Other factions being more powerful makes for a more interesting setting imo, but ymmv. "Humanity, feth yeah" can be fun too.
Also, after what titus did to orks and chaos in the first game I have no issues with him killing a warrior. I'm just glad the swarmlord managed to keep out of his sight.
Dang it, look at what you made me do. Now I'm off topic too
On the whole "Meltas suck vs. armor"/"we don't have real anti armor capability": what I could see working pretty good without getting into this whole "If SoB Meltas get buffed, than SM Meltas should get the same stats!" mess:
Marine and Guard Melta DOES suck though. That Sisters are more reliant on it as their sole form of AT is from a potential failure in army design.
I wouldn't necessarily say Guard/Marine Meltas suck, just that they are not the anti vehicle weapon they once were. They are still nice weapons against t4-T7 stuff with good armor values, multiple wounds and/or feel no pain. Like Space Marines, Custodes, bikes, sentinels etc. So them loosing out against vehicles kind of hurts these factions less, as they have alternatives to deal with heavy vehicles.
From what I hear Sisters have not. Therefore I would too say: give them something to make Meltas work against vehicles. Changing the baseprofil is (in my opinion) not the way to go, as it would in the long run also buff IG and SM. And at least looking at IG we don't really need that.
So my proposition was along the line: give Sisters something that makes the melta effectiveness go up. And as they can have a lot of meltas, some bonus for shooting multiples at the same target sounded valid. One would just have to figure out what works.
Could also be something like "If a unit shoots meltas at a target, add the total number of Meltas to their strength value". So Retributors/Dominions with 4 Melta weapons would shoot them at S12.
I hope they get a "Holy trinity" detachment that buffs their melta/flamer/bolters
See, this SOUNDS like it would be good, until you remember that Sisters are also a melee army. A 'holy trinity' detachment helps their anemic shooting be slightly less anemic, but it doesn't help their wet noodle melee being any less wet noodle.
I hope they get a "Holy trinity" detachment that buffs their melta/flamer/bolters
See, this SOUNDS like it would be good, until you remember that Sisters are also a melee army. A 'holy trinity' detachment helps their anemic shooting be slightly less anemic, but it doesn't help their wet noodle melee being any less wet noodle.
So what? You want every aspect of an army to be good? There probably will also be a detachment that buffs melee too.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
alextroy wrote: A detachment cannot fix an army issue. That would just lock the army into one detachment choice.
True, but the odds are, every army is gonna have one detachment thats stronger anyway
Just watching a painful battle report with Sisters vs Necrons.
I ve noticed the main channels have avoided putting Sisters into any of the matchups apart from Death Guard and Blood Angels. Like I think they even said they went for a weaker list with less tanks.
I am not saying they’re avoiding putting the army forward to get curb stomped but sure looks like it.
Really, I’ve got other projects so can wait until they get normal rules. They need to seriously rethink the army. Bloody Rose getting plus one attack on the charge isn’t going to revolutionise the army as people keep saying.
I hope they get a "Holy trinity" detachment that buffs their melta/flamer/bolters
See, this SOUNDS like it would be good, until you remember that Sisters are also a melee army. A 'holy trinity' detachment helps their anemic shooting be slightly less anemic, but it doesn't help their wet noodle melee being any less wet noodle.
So what? You want every aspect of an army to be good? There probably will also be a detachment that buffs melee too.
I mean, between repentia, zephyrim, sacresants, paragons, and the new penitent engines, a surprising number of sisters units have ended up being melee-focused. There's nothing wrong with wanting a unit to be viable in general, but we especially probably don't want to write off melee as a whole for sisters given how much of the faction's options are melee units. List diversity and all that.
I don't think kroot should be bad at melee just because tau on the whole are decent at shooting.
alextroy wrote: A detachment cannot fix an army issue. That would just lock the army into one detachment choice.
True, but the odds are, every army is gonna have one detachment thats stronger anyway
You're not wrong, but that doesn't mean that that should be the case.
I will say, I was excitedly putting together immolators and paragon suits in preparation for 10th. Then I saw the uninspiring stats for melta weapons this edition and it kind of has me apprehensive about putting my sisters on the table. I may end up just spamming flamers or heavy bolters instead. Just give up on trading blows with enemy parking lots and try to win games through objective control and tarpitting.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Totalwar1402 wrote: Just watching a painful battle report with Sisters vs Necrons.
I ve noticed the main channels have avoided putting Sisters into any of the matchups apart from Death Guard and Blood Angels. Like I think they even said they went for a weaker list with less tanks.
I am not saying they’re avoiding putting the army forward to get curb stomped but sure looks like it.
Really, I’ve got other projects so can wait until they get normal rules. They need to seriously rethink the army. Bloody Rose getting plus one attack on the charge isn’t going to revolutionise the army as people keep saying.
FWIW, my second game of 10th the other day saw me table my opponent's sororitas with my unoptimized craftworlders. I had the lances to kill his castigator on turn 1, his battle sisters on turn 2, and the rest of the game was basically just me kiting his melee units and shooting lances at Celestine until she stayed down.
tbh melta is one of the core rules I think ought to be reworked a bit.
Having melta increase the strength of your gun rather than the damage would allow them to function more as the intended close range anti-medium vehicle weaponry and in particular would help sisters have each squad feel like a credible threat as getting to the point where you can spike with a guaranteed high damage roll not impossible.
...they also need the ability to 20-up their basic troop squad, to make their characters make sense. Every army with fixed 10-man troop units needs that.
...they also need the ability to 20-up their basic troop squad, to make their characters make sense. Every army with fixed 10-man troop units needs that.
Totalwar1402 wrote: Pretty easy to solve melta. Just say it gets anti vehicle 4 plus within melta range.
But this is the issue. You can’t make a change like that without doing it to everybody because the melta is a common weapon.
Technically they can do exactly that as weapons are datasheet based.
yeah, it would make sense for Sisters' melta to be better than the rest of the meltas in the game considering its theyre only anti-tank and a huge part of their fluff
It already didn't make sense that getting your flamer from the Ministorum makes it better for some reason. It's just a fudge to try to cover over failures in faction design.
Lord Damocles wrote: It already didn't make sense that getting your flamer from the Ministorum makes it better for some reason. It's just a fudge to try to cover over failures in faction design.
in a universe where religion/belief has a tangible effect on the physical world, having blessed bolters/meltas/flamers makes sense that they would be better
Lord Damocles wrote: It already didn't make sense that getting your flamer from the Ministorum makes it better for some reason. It's just a fudge to try to cover over failures in faction design.
in a universe where religion/belief has a tangible effect on the physical world, having blessed bolters/meltas/flamers makes sense that they would be better
Or they have special limited production runs by the Adeptus Mechanicus or using special fuels/ammunition that is more effective.
Totalwar1402 wrote: Pretty easy to solve melta. Just say it gets anti vehicle 4 plus within melta range.
But this is the issue. You can’t make a change like that without doing it to everybody because the melta is a common weapon.
Technically they can do exactly that as weapons are datasheet based.
yeah, it would make sense for Sisters' melta to be better than the rest of the meltas in the game considering its theyre only anti-tank and a huge part of their fluff
Also, our flamers and stormbolters are already better than Marine's.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Lord Damocles wrote: It already didn't make sense that getting your flamer from the Ministorum makes it better for some reason. It's just a fudge to try to cover over failures in faction design.
If you're making an argument about 40k that involves the words 'doesn't make sense' you've lost the plot.
...they also need the ability to 20-up their basic troop squad, to make their characters make sense. Every army with fixed 10-man troop units needs that.
Skitarii Marshal would be op /s
Obviously the reason Skitarii can't have multiple Plasma Calivers or Arqs in their squads is for balance reasons.
Let's not pretend that giving Sisters bespoke Imperial standard equipment was anything else but an arbitrary decision in an no holds barred arms race edition.
a_typical_hero wrote: Let's not pretend that giving Sisters bespoke Imperial standard equipment was anything else but an arbitrary decision in an no holds barred arms race edition.
Oh, yeah, but a fancy flamer for blood angels tanks was a total lore move.
There are many ways to parse the Sisters have better Imperial Weapons issue.
On one hand, it is certainly an effort to make the army work without expanding their wargear options beyond the traditional Trinity and known additional weapons. An army needs to work on it's own merits regardless of what the standard rules state.
On the other hand, Sisters have always been known to be equipped with the best arms the vast wealth of the Imperial Church can buy. It is also well know that the best weapons of any type (mastercrafted) have better stats than the run of the mill versions.
So it doesn't strain background for SOB to have better bolters, flamers, and meltas than the average Imperial versions to allow them to function as an effective army in the game.
a_typical_hero wrote: Let's not pretend that giving Sisters bespoke Imperial standard equipment was anything else but an arbitrary decision in an no holds barred arms race edition.
Oh, yeah, but a fancy flamer for blood angels tanks was a total lore move.
a_typical_hero wrote: Let's not pretend that giving Sisters bespoke Imperial standard equipment was anything else but an arbitrary decision in an no holds barred arms race edition.
Oh, yeah, but a fancy flamer for blood angels tanks was a total lore move.
What fancy flamer?
I think they're talking about the Baal predator tank's flamer.
I'm fine with giving sisters "ministrorum meltas" that perform as needed for the faction not to be hosed, but do we actually need to make an exception like that? Would guard or marines be OP if their meltaguns were suddenly effective against tanks?
...they also need the ability to 20-up their basic troop squad, to make their characters make sense. Every army with fixed 10-man troop units needs that.
Skitarii Marshal would be op /s
Obviously the reason Skitarii can't have multiple Plasma Calivers or Arqs in their squads is for balance reasons.
nah, its for the cohesive look of the squad, gotta have vanguards lugging around that arquebuse to be fluffy
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Wyldhunt wrote: [
I think they're talking about the Baal predator tank's flamer.
I'm fine with giving sisters "ministrorum meltas" that perform as needed for the faction not to be hosed, but do we actually need to make an exception like that? Would guard or marines be OP if their meltaguns were suddenly effective against tanks?
OP? probably not, but these factions already have plenty of effective anti-tank. The whole point of making every datasheet unrelated to the rest is so you can do stuff like buff a specific version of a gun without doing sweeping changed to the whole game.
a_typical_hero wrote: Let's not pretend that giving Sisters bespoke Imperial standard equipment was anything else but an arbitrary decision in an no holds barred arms race edition.
Oh, yeah, but a fancy flamer for blood angels tanks was a total lore move.
What fancy flamer?
I think they're talking about the Baal predator tank's flamer.
Isn't it just a TL Heavy Flamer? Or is it an attached one from the LR Redeemer?
- Meltas suck. Though this affects all armies with them, but more-so for Sisters as they rely on them. Meltas either need to move to S10 base or have the melta rule changed to add both strength and damage at half range.
- Their leaders are too expensive and too limited in which units they can join. Simple fix, point drops and expand the list of units they can attach to.
- They're an infantry focused faction with no ability to horde. Novitiate's at minimum should be allowed in squads of 20, potentially Battle Sisters as well.
My input here is based entirely on what I've read here and not from any experience of playing sisters, so please shut me down if I'm talking rubbish.
Without giving them a new detachment rule, Sisters could probably get away with having their meltas gain +2 S while in melta range. Fancy meltas and all that noise.
Or they could have a blanket "Fire and Fury" rule where their flamers and meltas gain twin linked if the target has already been hit by a flamer or melta from another squad. The bonuses to wound here would probably be fine as it still relies on "tracer fire" from a first unit.
Jarms48 wrote: Honestly, I see 3 major issues with Sisters.
- Meltas suck. Though this affects all armies with them, but more-so for Sisters as they rely on them. Meltas either need to move to S10 base or have the melta rule changed to add both strength and damage at half range.
- Their leaders are too expensive and too limited in which units they can join. Simple fix, point drops and expand the list of units they can attach to.
- They're an infantry focused faction with no ability to horde. Novitiate's at minimum should be allowed in squads of 20, potentially Battle Sisters as well.
In the leaks from a few months ago, with rules that were used to initialy test 10th. Melta had the same strenght, but an anti vehicle +4 rule, somehow it was lost between the tests and final version.
...they also need the ability to 20-up their basic troop squad, to make their characters make sense. Every army with fixed 10-man troop units needs that.
Skitarii Marshal would be op /s
Obviously the reason Skitarii can't have multiple Plasma Calivers or Arqs in their squads is for balance reasons.
As a drukhari player I do have to point out that at least your mandatory mixed onesie-onesie squad loadout was *A LEGAL BUILD BEFORE*
so there are, in theory, somewhere, maybe, admech players with existing armies that werent fethed over by the transition. XD
There was not one single wrack or kabalite warrior squad correctly built when 10e dropped.
...they also need the ability to 20-up their basic troop squad, to make their characters make sense. Every army with fixed 10-man troop units needs that.
Skitarii Marshal would be op /s
Obviously the reason Skitarii can't have multiple Plasma Calivers or Arqs in their squads is for balance reasons.
As a drukhari player I do have to point out that at least your mandatory mixed onesie-onesie squad loadout was *A LEGAL BUILD BEFORE*
so there are, in theory, somewhere, maybe, admech players with existing armies that werent fethed over by the transition. XD
There was not one single wrack or kabalite warrior squad correctly built when 10e dropped.
If memory served me right, Kalabites were 2 Specials 1 Heavy in a 10 man Squad, correct?
As a drukhari player I do have to point out that at least your mandatory mixed onesie-onesie squad loadout was *A LEGAL BUILD BEFORE*
so there are, in theory, somewhere, maybe, admech players with existing armies that werent fethed over by the transition. XD
There was not one single wrack or kabalite warrior squad correctly built when 10e dropped.
i'll be honest, i'm a drukhari player and i only skimmed the index, it seems soooo boring so i didnt go into the minutia of it. Then i started seeing that its "DarkLance : the index" and got even more put off.
EviscerationPlague wrote: If memory served me right, Kalabites were 2 Specials 1 Heavy in a 10 man Squad, correct?
In 9th yes. Weirdly before that you had a rule where it was 1 special per unit, or 2 if you had 20 Kabalites. While Heavies were 1 per 10.
Shame, but I guess we're all WAAC players that go against the Jervis vision since we don't like rolling 5 different weapons for shooting in a single squad.
OP? probably not, but these factions already have plenty of effective anti-tank. The whole point of making every datasheet unrelated to the rest is so you can do stuff like buff a specific version of a gun without doing sweeping changed to the whole game.
True. But if the notion of having meltas and better-meltas was really jarring for people, we could hypothetically probably give everyone the better-meltas without breaking anything, right?
As a drukhari player I do have to point out that at least your mandatory mixed onesie-onesie squad loadout was *A LEGAL BUILD BEFORE*
so there are, in theory, somewhere, maybe, admech players with existing armies that werent fethed over by the transition. XD
There was not one single wrack or kabalite warrior squad correctly built when 10e dropped.
i'll be honest, i'm a drukhari player and i only skimmed the index, it seems soooo boring so i didnt go into the minutia of it. Then i started seeing that its "DarkLance : the index" and got even more put off.
Also a drukhari player here. There's some nice stuff in there aside from dark lance spam. Pain tokens are neat. Scourges finally having move-shoot-move is neat. Heat lances are finally good.
It's just that the changes to poison and to vehicles overall mean that whatever else you're doing, you kind of have to spam dark lances to avoid being completely impotent against non-infantry enemies. And whatever upsides the index has are kind of drowned out by continued loss of unit customization, super restrictive character/squad combos (you can't have an archon hang out with his traditional bodyguard unit of incubi or a haemonculus hang out with his grotesques), and a bunch of other annoying little changes. Plus some editions-old oversights like archons not being able to buff units while in their transports despite warriors really not wanting to leave their transports.
Jarms48 wrote: Honestly, I see 3 major issues with Sisters.
- Meltas suck. Though this affects all armies with them, but more-so for Sisters as they rely on them. Meltas either need to move to S10 base or have the melta rule changed to add both strength and damage at half range.
- Their leaders are too expensive and too limited in which units they can join. Simple fix, point drops and expand the list of units they can attach to.
- They're an infantry focused faction with no ability to horde. Novitiate's at minimum should be allowed in squads of 20, potentially Battle Sisters as well.
In the leaks from a few months ago, with rules that were used to initialy test 10th. Melta had the same strenght, but an anti vehicle +4 rule, somehow it was lost between the tests and final version.
I'm not going to lie, Im fine with melta wounding things on 5's versus heavier targets. It's a gun brought in bulk and I enjoy not having centre piece models just instantly dunked like in 9th leading to obscene rules (My entire 9th daemon book, 3++++ saves?!)
Tanks aren’t centrepiece models. They’re inexpensive and you can take an army of them.
Meltaguns shouldn’t be chipping away at vehicles. It’s an extremely short range gun that means you have to cross the board and get point blank to fire it. The risk reward isn’t present. You probably are only to get one shot in the game before the enemy army deletes you. Other anti tank guns can shoot you safely across the board and are better because reasons.
Sisters are too expensive points wise to bring the volume of melta so that you don’t care if your squads are killed.
They aren’t tough enough to survive any kind of firepower or counter charge. They only worked in previous editions because of their high damage output to kill them before you got targeted.
Either Sisters get buffed or they go down in points and become a horde army. It’s pretty clear cut.
Totalwar1402 wrote: Tanks aren’t centrepiece models. They’re inexpensive and you can take an army of them.
Meltaguns shouldn’t be chipping away at vehicles. It’s an extremely short range gun that means you have to cross the board and get point blank to fire it. The risk reward isn’t present. You probably are only to get one shot in the game before the enemy army deletes you. Other anti tank guns can shoot you safely across the board and are better because reasons.
Sisters are too expensive points wise to bring the volume of melta so that you don’t care if your squads are killed.
They aren’t tough enough to survive any kind of firepower or counter charge. They only worked in previous editions because of their high damage output to kill them before you got targeted.
Either Sisters get buffed or they go down in points and become a horde army. It’s pretty clear cut.
As Stu mentions, the Studio are watching these results – and in particular the win-rate percentages – very carefully, and will be looking to make more targeted changes where necessary. The change to Aeldari Fate dice has already made an impact, as have points increases for overperforming units. Underperforming factions are definitely on the list for attention soon, so watch this space.
Yeah 12 is short range. That’s the same as a pistol, it puts you in rapid fire and easy charge range. It’s a third to a quarter of your normal ranged heavy weapon. That translates into less shots across the game and putting yourself at extreme risk.
I don’t think Sisters are point costed as a horde. 110 points for a unit that can’t instantly regenerate but has a weaker profile than the games standard troops isn’t in a good position. Also the unit size limit really messes with them being a horde. They’re pretty much in the same position they’ve always been of being about 2/3 cost of a marine apart from ridiculous cases like being the same cost as Retributors being same cost as Devastator marines because reasons. They should at least be half the points of marines and probably a bit less given what other T3 armies get in terms of damage.
Again, I point at the rulebook quote on them being durable. GW clearly overvalue that armour save and assumed damage would drop evenly across all the factions.
Either Sisters get buffed or they go down in points and become a horde army. It’s pretty clear cut.
Sisters are close enough in points to be a horde army, so maybe it should just be committed to.
No army that has its core mechanic based around part of it being dead. should be "close" to horde. GSC are horde, IG can be horde. Orks can be horde. SoB are not horde and neither are Votan. And the win rates show, that crucial errors have been done during the construction of index for both of those armies.
As Stu mentions, the Studio are watching these results – and in particular the win-rate percentages – very carefully, and will be looking to make more targeted changes where necessary. The change to Aeldari Fate dice has already made an impact, as have points increases for overperforming units. Underperforming factions are definitely on the list for attention soon, so watch this space.
maybe they will do something....maybe
Dropping from 80% win rate to top 3 army, isn't much of a nerf. Especialy for armies with around or under 30% win rates.
