Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Lammia wrote:
Honestly, I'm right behind not using Repressors. If the only thing that makes our Codex work is a FW unit, our Codex doesn't work. I'd rather we give feedback on our Codex units so GW can get them right on their own in the future too.

My regular group is pretty consistently Forge World free, so all of my test games should do this. I'm also going to try to limit allies for a while, although I am working up a little allied Guard force and my Scions have been a mainstay of late.

 Creeping Dementia wrote:
I've had a couple days to comtemplate the codex and how I'll revamp my approach to the Codex. I'm getting ready for a couple more games (hopefully this weekend). I'm trying to really get down to the actual strengths of the new codex and focus on maximizing them.
Apparently I was insane for trying to test out the units in the Codex last time, so I will include Repressors this time.
If that doesn't work out, I'll move on to the next idea.

This is really what I wanted to see. People buckling down and seeing what the book can do.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 alextroy wrote:
As much fun as it may be to try to find the "best builds" for the Beta Codex or to dream up your favorite "correction" to the Faith Rules in the Beta Codex, that is not what we really need. We need to play the codex we are given and provide solid feedback on what those rules have done to the army.

Don't dismiss units because you theory-hammer them as bad.
Don't ignore Faith because you theory-hammer it as too low in impact, too much trouble to bother, etc.

Play as many aspects of the Beta Codex and then provide feedback on what isn't working and why. Only with such experience backing your feedback will GW pay any attention to your input.

I'm really going to need to scare up some games once I get CA so that I can provide some input. And I'm going to start by taking my unoptimized Index Army and playing it with the Beta Codex to tell how it is different and if it end ups being better, worst, or just different.

YES!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Lammia wrote:
Honestly, I'm right behind not using Repressors. If the only thing that makes our Codex work is a FW unit, our Codex doesn't work. I'd rather we give feedback on our Codex units so GW can get them right on their own in the future too.

While I agree with the sentiment that the codex should be good by itself... FW is very mainstream now (and has been for years) and is basically part of the codex. Ignore it if you want, but I'm sure GW didn't. I would think that we'll see either a re-release of the FW kit next year or a plastic version with the launch.

For anyone who's seen the leaks: Do sisters have a multiple relic stratagem?

 Creeping Dementia wrote:

It's not theory-hammer.
I've played games, Faith had little to no impact, so I'm not building to maximize it. Right now Faith is like having grenades on my Wych squads, I use it because they have them, it would be silly not to, but it's not a large or important part of the army so I'm not going to try weird or obscure tactics to try to maximize the impact of grenades (or Faith).

Same with larger Sisters squads, they are more survivable, but too slow and don't accomplish much, so I'm going to small squads in transports next.
I played a bunch of games using units from the codex, and was dismissed as insane for not using Repressors (cause they aren't in the codex).

I think this is by design
GW has gone to a straight up math based balance in 8e and nixed a lot of the fluffier abilities, probably done by a big spreadsheet, by adding in an X factor like faith they need to balance all future releases against it rather than just make it a fluffy, but ultimately nearly useless thing.

I totally agree with "don't build for faith points, don't count on faith points" for this book

With shield of faith affecting vehicles and lots of easy ways to increase the SoF save, its hard to argue with the increased durability that SoB vehicles have.

That said, the same argument can apply to Sisters blobs, especially with a 4++ and FnP with the right conviction. I feel confident that SoB are now hands down the most survivable (T3) infantry in the game.

Out of curiosity, does anyone know what size base the penitent engine goes on? Is it a 60mm? Pretty much everything that’s not a penitent engine is on a 25 with the exception of Celestine and the Geminae, correct?

 Grundz wrote:

 Frowbakk wrote:
I'm thinking that the best option for the Holy Trinity is a 6-strong unit of Retributors with 4 Heavy Flamers, a Combi-Melta for the Sister Superior and the 'extra' bolter Retributor to go cruising around in an Immolator with Immolation Cannon.

Since they can disembark 9" and burn down a target within 8" (17" "range") with 4d6 autohits wounding Marines on 2's and Knights on 4's, backed up by a Melta shot and a bolter shooting in Rapid Fire range that would mean 7 or 8 dead Marines not even counting the Immolation Cannon.

Of course, the one downside is points, as this combo comes in just slightly under the cost of two Exorcists.

Trinity becomes absurdly strong when you exceed your basic 10 man sisters squad

Against most targets, 2 meltas and a combiflamer with the 10 man squad + trinity does about 40% more wounds than with 3 meltas (at any toughness) this balloons up to almost twice as many wounds at T8
I'm considering nixing one rhino/repressor and just having one trinity full 15 man sister squad following up the rear, instead of an expensive countercharge unit they can wipe out quite a lot of things with trinity + possibly +1 to hit Its really not expensive in cp or points to hurl 16 average wounds at a target. at ~170pts

They do suffer terribly against units with large numbers of wounds but there should be enough melta rolling around to deal with it.

Also don't forget that you can pick up a melta trooper on a 4+ on any squad, once a turn, so unless units are wiped out they are always fairly dangerous

 MacPhail wrote:

 Mmmpi wrote:
Unless the beta changed it, BSS can't have two heavy flamers.

That's two units of ten with a melta and a heavy flamer each... although I think Frowbakk is onto something when he suggests HF Rets as the best target for Holy Trinity.

So, thinking out loud... Ten Retributors for 90 points, Four Heavy Flamers at 56, CombiMelta on the Superior for 15 and in a Rhino for 75 totals out to 236.

1 CP - Holy Trinity would give them +1 to Wound. However, ALSO 1 CP - Faith and Fury lets them re-roll 1's to wound, but only if they have had a successful test for an Act of Faith.

The only AoF useable in the Shooting Phase is Divine Guidance, which goes off on a 4+.

So, rather than a coin-flip, add in a Simulacrum Imperialis for 10 points, be Order of the Ebon Chalice and get that AoF off on a 2+.

Is it clutch enough to drop a Bolter Retributor and have a Dialogus ride along for the re-rollable 2+ AoF (only 1 in 36 chance of failure)? Might as well have a Canoness ride along in another vehicle for the re-roll 1's to hit aura and bring the Dialogus along in her ride rather than boot a Bolter Retributor out of the unit to make space.

So Turn 1, Drive the Rhino 12" +d6" towards your target. Preferably with a lot of other Rhinos/Immolators/Etc to draw any enemy enmity...

Turn 2, Disembark 3", Move 6" (Or what the hell, 9" with Hand of the Emperor going of on a 2+ as well), to get within the 8" range with the Heavy Flamers (which gets the Bolters within double-tap range).

Assuming everything is in range and that Divine Guidance goes off on a 2+, then pop the 1 CP - Faith and Fury to allow re-rolls of 1's to wound, another 1 CP - Holy Trinity for a +1 to Wound.

Hitting on 2's due to Divine Guidance and in the re-roll 1's Aura of a Canoness then quick estimate mathammer (someone else can run the real numbers) means 5 Rapid Firing Bolters hitting on a re-rollable 2+, the Superior's Combi-Melta also dropping all shots on a 3+ with re-rolling 1's (because Holy Trinity says that EVERYTHING in the unit must fire at the same target) and with 4d6 Heavy Flamer auto hits on top.

So 14-ish S5 AP -1 hits, 10-12 S4 AP - hits and an S8 AP -4 hit with +1 to wound and re-roll 1's to wound.

If shooting Marines, that would be 14-ish 2+ re-rollable wounds, saving on a 4+ from the Heavy Flamers (so maybe 7 unsaved wounds), 10 to 12 Bolters wounding on 3's and re-rolling 1's, saving on 3's (so 3 to 4 unsaved wounds) and a Melta shot re-rolling to wound (for a d6 unsaved wounds) meaning 10 or so Dead Marines or 5 Primaris gone.

Against a Knight the Heavy Flamers would wound on a 4+ and re-roll 1's, saved on a 4+ (meaning 4 wounds get through, assuming no 3++ shenanigans), Bolters wound on 5's, re-rolling 1's (so 1 or 2 get past the armor save) and then the Melta shot wounds on a 3+, re-rolling 1's for another probable 2 d6 damage, pick the highest to get through. Perhaps 6 to 8 or more wounds on a Knight, or a few more to T7 Transport give or take.

So, still just under the cost of two Exorcists at 246 points and supported by a Canoness, Dialogus, an Act of Faith and 2 CP.

Who's ready to throw some heretics on the 'barbie?

 godswildcard wrote:
With shield of faith affecting vehicles and lots of easy ways to increase the SoF save, its hard to argue with the increased durability that SoB vehicles have.

That said, the same argument can apply to Sisters blobs, especially with a 4++ and FnP with the right conviction. I feel confident that SoB are now hands down the most survivable (T3) infantry in the game.

Out of curiosity, does anyone know what size base the penitent engine goes on? Is it a 60mm? Pretty much everything that’s not a penitent engine is on a 25 with the exception of Celestine and the Geminae, correct?

Pen engines historically went on a 60

I'm not too sold on sisters shield of faith on the infantry being great, I dont see tremendous masses of ap-4 weapons focus firing t3 infantry over immolators, so while useful over the course of a game it doesn't seem worth it to stack up the banners or anything to really make those invulnerable saves "good" to where your average anti infantry stuff isn't mowing down sisters anymore.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Lammia wrote:
Honestly, I'm right behind not using Repressors. If the only thing that makes our Codex work is a FW unit, our Codex doesn't work. I'd rather we give feedback on our Codex units so GW can get them right on their own in the future too.

While I agree with the sentiment that the codex should be good by itself... FW is very mainstream now (and has been for years) and is basically part of the codex. Ignore it if you want, but I'm sure GW didn't. I would think that we'll see either a re-release of the FW kit next year or a plastic version with the launch.

I agree with a lot of what you say, and we should definitely test Repressors with the Army too. I just feel that this is a unique opportunity to set a standard for GW about what we want from our army in future and building it around FW's rule writing is fraught with so many potential problems. If they were a part of this Beta, that would be fine. But as it is, we can only guess how much they're involved with each other.

Basically, we need to be willing to embrace all choices each other make in their testing.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mmmpi wrote:
For anyone who's seen the leaks: Do sisters have a multiple relic stratagem?

It was mentioned very briefly in passing, we do.

Can anyone confirm if Taddeus and Pious Vorne from Blackstone Fortress made it on to the list of Ministorum units that can be included in a Sororitas detachment?

 pretre wrote:
FW is very mainstream now (and has been for years) and is basically part of the codex. Ignore it if you want, but I'm sure GW didn't.

I really can't see the designers factoring in a model that they haven't produced for the better part of a decade when it comes to balancing this codex.

 dracpanzer wrote:
Can anyone confirm if Taddeus and Pious Vorne from Blackstone Fortress made it on to the list of Ministorum units that can be included in a Sororitas detachment?

I can confirm that Taddeus will make it into my Sororitas detachments...somehow.

 MacPhail wrote:

 Mmmpi wrote:
Unless the beta changed it, BSS can't have two heavy flamers.

That's two units of ten with a melta and a heavy flamer each... although I think Frowbakk is onto something when he suggests HF Rets as the best target for Holy Trinity.

I was thinking this, too, but str 5 vs str 6 doesn't really change your rolls against many targets. better against IG and Eldar, but not much else.

 deviantduck wrote:

That's two units of ten with a melta and a heavy flamer each... although I think Frowbakk is onto something when he suggests HF Rets as the best target for Holy Trinity.

I was thinking this, too, but str 5 vs str 6 doesn't really change your rolls against many targets. better against IG and Eldar, but not much else.

PuppetSoul wrote:
Going to compare the previous Act of Faith system to the new one real quick.

Previously, you got a 2+ for the army, a free one for Celestine, and a 4+ for up to 3 imagifiers, for a potential of five per battle round.

Now you get 3+(Sisters/10) points for all battle rounds.

On average, the Acts of Faith would go off on a 3.

On average, the new AoFs go off on a 4.

Assuming you run 100 Sisters, which is almost undoubtedly going to be close to twice what you actually run because of the removal of double-shooting, you would get 13 tests of faith per game (assuming no other sources of faith are taken).

So without any other inputs, in a six round game, the previous system you would have had THIRTY Acts of Faith that go off on a 3 and are strictly stronger (double move, double shoot, etc.), compared to THIRTEEN that go off on a 4.

Not only are the new Acts of Faith significantly worse in function, but you get less than half the number (more realistically less than a third).

Realistically though, the only one that has enough of a game impact to remember that the AoF system exists is Passion, and it goes off on a 5.

So the new system would be best described as less than half the attempts, that go off less than half as often, for less than half of the benefit.

This is some extremely fuzzy back-of-the-envelope mathhammer.

First off, your averaging is off and an imperfect way to compare. You're not even referring to the average and don't take into account the number of 4+ rolls you need, just that there is one. You're actual average roll is 3.5 in the scenario you paint up there. That doesn't mean you get to say that you get "THIRTY Acts of Faith that go off on a 3" though. You get 6 for free and then only 6 more that go off on less than 3. Then 15 that require a 4+.

If you really want to math it out, in a 6-turn game you automatically get 6, average out another 5, and then can average out to an additional 9, so 20 on average. And sure, that's awesome, BUT you had to spend 120 points to make that happen. Also, and quite frankly I'm a little surprised no one is mentioning this, those extra AoF were all dependent on where certain characters were standing on the board whereas the new system is army-wide. This allows for a little more flexibility and keeps you from having to babysit units with characters with minimal offensive output, which could end up wasting some of those potential AoF.

I mean, to give you a scenario, let's say you double shoot with a BSS squad that has an imagifier nearby and then there are no more units in range, but they have to camp an objective. Either you're wasting potential AoF turns by standing still, being in a transport, or spending them on the character itself to hustle her across the board to a spot where she's useful. Or even if the unit doesn't have to camp but you need to move them, they can only go as fast as the imagifier if the army-wide AoF is needed elsewhere, so there are potential turns of wasted AoF there as well. Of course that's assuming you get the 4+ roll each turn, but are you willing to spend a CP so they can double move if not?

It's also a little dishonest of you to say "without any other inputs" since the new system is all about inputs. I mean, you can choose one of the convictions to get an army-wide +1 to the roll for free, and there are several other ways to beef up that roll. But with the old system the roll was what it was and you couldn't manipulate it without spending CP for a re-roll, which you can still do. You also have multiple ways to regenerate faith points or simply add new ones and even a new ability that lets you spread a single AoF to multiple units who are not sisters, something you could not do before. If you play your cards right you actually have a better chance for the abilities to go off on a wider number of units in any given turn than you did in the index.

So yes, under the old system you had the POTENTIAL for more overall in the game, but it wasn't as much of a guarantee as you're making it sound, nor 100% useful every turn, and you're not limited to one army-wide and several small 6" board pockets under the new system. Point is, there have been trade-offs that you're not acknowledging, which ends up painting a much bleaker picture.

I will admit that AoF are not perfect (once per battle round is extremely limiting) and that some of the new abilities themselves are underwhelming in comparison to what we used to get. Plus some of the combos will require careful logistics and strategy and won't come cheap. But the roll mechanic and potential total Acts you can get are hardly the big problem with the beta system.

confoo22 wrote:

I will admit that AoF are not perfect (once per battle round is extremely limiting) and that some of the new abilities themselves are underwhelming in comparison to what we used to get. Plus some of the combos will require careful logistics and strategy and won't come cheap. But the roll mechanic and potential total Acts you can get are hardly the big problem with the beta system.

TBH double shoot would be total madness with the +3cp aura stratagem so I see why it had to go

No doubt. In absence of all the additional toys we're getting in the beta the previous AoF made sense, but if those had remained the same and add all the new stuff? Yikes. I mean, I love a good laugher as much as the next guy but would rather earn it through good play instead of overwhelming game mechanics.

 Grundz wrote:

 deviantduck wrote:

That's two units of ten with a melta and a heavy flamer each... although I think Frowbakk is onto something when he suggests HF Rets as the best target for Holy Trinity. I was thinking this, too, but str 5 vs str 6 doesn't really change your rolls against many targets. better against IG and Eldar, but not much else.

holy trinity doesn't increase the strength by 1, it increases the ROLL by one, so a str 5 weapon is rolling the equivalent of a strength 8 weapon vs t4 its deceptively more powerful the bigger the spread gets, you're still wounding a warlord titan on a 5/6 with a bolter, hah.

edit: speaking of trinity, giving a basic sisters squad a heavy flamer, combi melta and melta appears to be the same points as two melta and a combi flamer, but you gain the +1str -1ap on the flamer

Yea I realized that after the fact.+1 to wound is pretty mighty.

 Amishprn86 wrote:
*snip*
maybe +6" movement instead of +3" movement (tho in their eyes the think sisters with large movement is scary, no joke, there was an interview with one of the play testers and he said that) *snip*

Where is that interview? I'm really interested in reading it!

FTN, its the normal guy and a play tester, he also talks about he was trying to get BA characters even cheaper lol

http://www.lounge.belloflostsouls.net/podcasts/FTNe264.mp3

Slightly less fuzzy maths, having celestine and 3 imagifiers plus using a cp to reroll the first failed aof test yields about 3.825 successes a turn - 19 passes over 5 turns is achievable with an index list.

Tailoring a beta codex list to match pace with this and assuming all tests are passed on a 2+ will need around 23 faith points - 200 bodies. I guess with 200 sisters you dont need to shoot twice? Such scalability.

On to actual tactics - can anyone confirm unit size/quantity of unit restrictions on geminae? With the passion now activating in the fight phase it is less situational, celestine using the passion and vessel might work well if you can take multiple larger geminae units.

Gemini are 1-2 per squad, max 1 squad per army... Sorry

Math is one thing but soft scores are another. Gw have said that the majority of players don't play matched. So it might be an idea to frame some of the feedback in terms of faction fantasy.

It's clear that the AoF system is designed to feel meaningful when you get one but at the same time it needs to be hamstrung because of vessels they can't make them too powerful. It's a simple fact that if vessels exists the AoF system has to be balanced around it and there's not a huge amount of point arguing for more powerful acts while it is a thing.

So, would you prefer more powerful acts and no vessels, or, less powerful acts and vessels? Which would be more forfilling to the faction fantasy?

Insularum wrote:

Slightly less fuzzy maths, having celestine and 3 imagifiers plus using a cp to reroll the first failed aof test yields about 3.825 successes a turn - 19 passes over 5 turns is achievable with an index list.

Tailoring a beta codex list to match pace with this and assuming all tests are passed on a 2+ will need around 23 faith points - 200 bodies. I guess with 200 sisters you dont need to shoot twice? Such scalability.

It sure was achievable, though your point about the CP for a re-roll doesn't really apply here since you can still do that, so it's not really a change from the old system. Also, you were spending a lot of points for that possibility in the index and sometimes you'd come down to the final turns and some of those AoF-generating units were too far from the action to be useful. So you trade off that increased quantity for lower cost, which allows for more flexible list-building, and a mechanic that allows you to more surgically target where you apply them. It's just not something that I would hold up as an example of why the beta system is so awful, just how it's different.

And of course anyone trying to use the beta system to match the index while assuming auto-passing is going to have a rough game. I'm not even sure where you got that from in my comment. I expect most players will start in the neighborhood of 7 to 9 and generate points over the course of the game, but will spam them far less due to decreased utility so they probably won't burn them all.

How much did hand flamers drop in points?

Thanks for confirming - shame though.


That would be great, except its not really the case - vessels isnt particularly strong (fight twice maybe, but with what units?), 3cp a turn means your going to use this a couple of times max; is it worth hamstringing your factions unique ability for that? Compare that with guard orders (actually scalable), ynnari soulbursts (op), or any flavour of marine auras - going from strong index to weak codex isnt going to be particularly fulfilling.

How do you see sisters being stronger outside of matched play? Lifting matched play restrictions benefits everyone, but more so if you have access to restricted items like psychic powers or low cp stratagems (i.e. not vessels).

For me vessels is extremely situational. It's very costly, and the benefits are questionable. The only scenarios I've seen where it is 'worth it' is:
A: playing against something with negative hit modifiers and you need to boost your Exorcists hit rolls.
B: you need to mass heal most of your army (tanks), which should be unlikely because decently skilled opponents usually focus down one thing at a time.

I can't see needing the double fight one with vessels, let's be honest, if all your infantry is engaged in CC you've probably already lost.

If Vessels is the thing that is keeping individual acts of Faith from being effective, then I'd be glad to be rid of it. I don't need AoF to be overpowered or anything, but right now with the mechanics we have they're just a footnote of little significance

Ok silly combo time.. order of the bloody rose + priest + passion (via vessels) gives 30 attacks per repressor on the charge against infantry. 6 fire ports can give some holy trinity options. Repressor doms will probably stay at the top of the pile of units carrying the sisters codex.

Insularum wrote:

Spoiler:

Drider wrote:Math is one thing but soft scores are another. Gw have said that the majority of players don't play matched. So it might be an idea to frame some of the feedback in terms of faction fantasy.

It's clear that the AoF system is designed to feel meaningful when you get one but at the same time it needs to be hamstrung because of vessels they can't make them too powerful. It's a simple fact that if vessels exists the AoF system has to be balanced around it and there's not a huge amount of point arguing for more powerful acts while it is a thing.

So, would you prefer more powerful acts and no vessels, or, less powerful acts and vessels? Which would be more forfilling to the faction fantasy?

That would be great, except its not really the case - vessels isnt particularly strong (fight twice maybe, but with what units?), 3cp a turn means your going to use this a couple of times max; is it worth hamstringing your factions unique ability for that? Compare that with guard orders (actually scalable), ynnari soulbursts (op), or any flavour of marine auras - going from strong index to weak codex isnt going to be particularly fulfilling.

How do you see sisters being stronger outside of matched play? Lifting matched play restrictions benefits everyone, but more so if you have access to restricted items like psychic powers or low cp stratagems (i.e. not vessels).

I don't think you're getting my point. I'm saying that the reason Index AoFs are gone is specifically because of Vessels. With Index AoFs Vessels would be extremely powerful, Yannari on crack, and the reason we have these massively toned down Acts is so that Vessels can exist and not be overpowered to all hell. It's like GW made the new Faith system, made the stratagems, realized vessels was OP and instead of fixing Vessels they neutered the Acts. While Vessels exists we wont get better better Acts because it will make Vessels to strong, so the only way to legitimately argue for better Acts is to argue for the removal of Vessels and for Faith to be balanced around it not being a thing.

I don't see sisters being any stronger outside of matched play and i don't know where you got that from. i said that "Gw have said that the majority of players don't play matched" and they don't design specifically for matched. So rather than submitting feedback purely from a competitive matched play perspective we also be giving them feedback about the soft scores of the beta codex. Does this feel like playing Sisters? Does the faith system feel rewarding when you get one? Do the chapter tactics make the Order of Our Martyred Lady feel like Martyred Lady? Does Bloody Rose feel like Bloody Rose? etc etc


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Insularum wrote:
Ok silly combo time.. order of the bloody rose + priest + passion (via vessels) gives 30 attacks per repressor on the charge against infantry. 6 fire ports can give some holy trinity options. Repressor doms will probably stay at the top of the pile of units carrying the sisters codex.

Vehicles don't get convictions, but my thoughts do keep returning to running multiple smash canonesses, celestine, priest, mistress and (multiple units of) repentia as BR and popping Passion Vessels to make the entire blob fight twice. To me it seems like the only way you're really going to get much bang for your buck out of the faith system.

To my knowledge, convictions and priest bonuses do not apply to vehicles. Units embarked in a vehicle cannot be affected by faith or stratagems so no hjoly trinity options. Expect vessels to be faqed to not apply to vehicles.

 Drider wrote:

Insularum wrote:

Spoiler:

Drider wrote:Math is one thing but soft scores are another. Gw have said that the majority of players don't play matched. So it might be an idea to frame some of the feedback in terms of faction fantasy.

It's clear that the AoF system is designed to feel meaningful when you get one but at the same time it needs to be hamstrung because of vessels they can't make them too powerful. It's a simple fact that if vessels exists the AoF system has to be balanced around it and there's not a huge amount of point arguing for more powerful acts while it is a thing.

So, would you prefer more powerful acts and no vessels, or, less powerful acts and vessels? Which would be more forfilling to the faction fantasy?

That would be great, except its not really the case - vessels isnt particularly strong (fight twice maybe, but with what units?), 3cp a turn means your going to use this a couple of times max; is it worth hamstringing your factions unique ability for that? Compare that with guard orders (actually scalable), ynnari soulbursts (op), or any flavour of marine auras - going from strong index to weak codex isnt going to be particularly fulfilling.

How do you see sisters being stronger outside of matched play? Lifting matched play restrictions benefits everyone, but more so if you have access to restricted items like psychic powers or low cp stratagems (i.e. not vessels).

I don't think you're getting my point. I'm saying that the reason Index AoFs are gone is specifically because of Vessels. With Index AoFs Vessels would be extremely powerful, Yannari on crack, and the reason we have these massively toned down Acts is so that Vessels can exist and not be overpowered to all hell. It's like GW made the new Faith system, made the stratagems, realized vessels was OP and instead of fixing Vessels they neutered the Acts. While Vessels exists we wont get better better Acts because it will make Vessels to strong, so the only way to legitimately argue for better Acts is to argue for the removal of Vessels and for Faith to be balanced around it not being a thing.

I don't see sisters being any stronger outside of matched play and i don't know where you got that from.

From what i read and heard from play testers, the reason it changed was b.c they saw every using only Double move and Double shoot and only on Seraphim and Celestine. They didnt want the army to play that way and changed it to reflect that. They wanted you to be able to more aof's for more units.

Now IMO they need to let us cast them more often, all AoF needs a +1 to cast, but it is Beta and we can ask for that.

Edit: Spelling