| Author |
Message |
 |
|
|
 |
|
Advert
|
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. |
|
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/08/24 22:56:01
Subject: Re:Sisters of Battle WD part 2
|
 |
Hooded Inquisitorial Interrogator
|
No rumor now, looking at it on page 85. I am sure she is an IC, just mentioning to show the total lack of proofing in the 2nd mag
|
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2011/08/24 22:58:40
If I was vain I would list stuff to make me sound good here. I decline. It's just a game after all.
House Rule -A common use of the term is to signify a deviation of game play from the official rules.
Do you allow Forgeworld 40k approved models and armies? |
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/08/24 22:56:10
Subject: Sisters of Battle WD part 2
|
 |
Sword-Bearing Inquisitorial Crusader
|
Doesnt mean she doesn't have it. There's things listed in the first half of the codex that need to be consulted in order to play the army, thus, if IC isn't written in both places she's still an IC regardless.
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/08/24 22:57:40
Subject: Sisters of Battle WD part 2
|
 |
Hooded Inquisitorial Interrogator
|
9SoB+vet sgt for those wondering
|
If I was vain I would list stuff to make me sound good here. I decline. It's just a game after all.
House Rule -A common use of the term is to signify a deviation of game play from the official rules.
Do you allow Forgeworld 40k approved models and armies? |
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/08/24 22:58:48
Subject: Sisters of Battle WD part 2
|
 |
Executing Exarch
|
Kreedos wrote:Doesnt mean she doesn't have it. There's things listed in the first half of the codex that need to be consulted in order to play the army, thus, if IC isn't written in both places she's still an IC regardless.
But it indicates sloppiness on the part of GW, which is yet another indicator that they really didn't put any time and effort into ensuring that this Codex was actually anywhere near competitive.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/08/24 23:02:36
Subject: Sisters of Battle WD part 2
|
 |
Sword-Bearing Inquisitorial Crusader
|
Oh believe me, I hate them too, but we're going to have to work with what we've got, which isn't gold, but not exactly crap either.
Sisters aren't as much of a mainstay power unit as they used to be, they're more of just a troop choice, in line with the rest of the troops in most armies.
Dominions and Seraphim are amazing units, Seraphim are the best shooters in the codex (as far as pushing out wounds) and dominions fill a spot in the WH dex that was lacking, some kind of surprise unit.
Cannoness and Celestian squad are overcosted, but a single 50 pt confessor/priest isn't, if the focus isn't put so much on the HQ, more points are to be had.
But, I'm just trying to be positive here.
|
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2011/08/24 23:07:56
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/08/24 23:04:55
Subject: Sisters of Battle WD part 2
|
 |
Hooded Inquisitorial Interrogator
|
Kreedos wrote:I believe the new Immolator might be 2 Melta shots instead of 1 twin linked shot.
Twinlinked, mm and HF
|
If I was vain I would list stuff to make me sound good here. I decline. It's just a game after all.
House Rule -A common use of the term is to signify a deviation of game play from the official rules.
Do you allow Forgeworld 40k approved models and armies? |
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/08/24 23:09:11
Subject: Sisters of Battle WD part 2
|
 |
Sword-Bearing Inquisitorial Crusader
|
NeedleOfInquiry wrote:Kreedos wrote:I believe the new Immolator might be 2 Melta shots instead of 1 twin linked shot.
Twinlinked, mm and HF
What about dominions, can they carry 4 special? Can Cannoness squad carry 3 special?
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/08/24 23:19:13
Subject: Sisters of Battle WD part 2
|
 |
Hooded Inquisitorial Interrogator
|
yes and yes
|
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2011/08/24 23:20:16
If I was vain I would list stuff to make me sound good here. I decline. It's just a game after all.
House Rule -A common use of the term is to signify a deviation of game play from the official rules.
Do you allow Forgeworld 40k approved models and armies? |
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/08/24 23:22:54
Subject: Re:Sisters of Battle WD part 2
|
 |
Regular Dakkanaut
|
The point of mentioning that Celestine isn't an IC in the 2nd part is that like the S4 Arcoflagellant and Cruddance's 10 man command unit the lack of proof reading shows that they don't care about this publication enough to make sure that glarring errors are checked before shoving this out the door.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/08/24 23:28:20
Subject: Sisters of Battle WD part 2
|
 |
Sword-Bearing Inquisitorial Crusader
|
10 Man command unit? You're saying that you have to take 10 in the squad?
|
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2011/08/24 23:28:57
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/08/24 23:31:02
Subject: Re:Sisters of Battle WD part 2
|
 |
Regular Dakkanaut
|
No according to the leak the command unit is 5 models but in Cruddance's army example he uses 10 which is illegal.
|
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2011/08/24 23:31:14
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/08/24 23:36:41
Subject: Re:Sisters of Battle WD part 2
|
 |
Hooded Inquisitorial Interrogator
|
Ixquic wrote:No according to the leak the command unit is 5 models but in Cruddance's army example he uses 10 which is illegal.
That is Uriah with a battle conclave, quite legal. The conclave does not take up a HQ slot.
|
If I was vain I would list stuff to make me sound good here. I decline. It's just a game after all.
House Rule -A common use of the term is to signify a deviation of game play from the official rules.
Do you allow Forgeworld 40k approved models and armies? |
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/08/24 23:37:47
Subject: Sisters of Battle WD part 2
|
 |
Sword-Bearing Inquisitorial Crusader
|
He specifically states his army was from and old cities of death campaign but builds it for new sisters or something, the whole thing was mashed up and crap pretty much. We all know the rules mongers probably aren't the best gamers.
|
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2011/08/24 23:38:09
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/08/24 23:41:53
Subject: Re:Sisters of Battle WD part 2
|
 |
Regular Dakkanaut
|
NeedleOfInquiry wrote:Ixquic wrote:No according to the leak the command unit is 5 models but in Cruddance's army example he uses 10 which is illegal.
That is Uriah with a battle conclave, quite legal. The conclave does not take up a HQ slot.
I'm talking about this
http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/blogPost.jsp?aId=17700021a&utm_term=other&utm_medium=email&utm_content=text-link-body&utm_source=e5700010-en_US&utm_campaign=SistersofBattleNewsletter-en_US
I understand that GW staff will never make a non boneheaded, competitive army since they are trying to make stuff that looks cool on the table top which I understand and am fine with. However I expect what they design to be a legal list especially when they wrote the rules themselves. How do you make that kind of mistake??
|
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2011/08/24 23:42:59
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/08/24 23:47:42
Subject: Sisters of Battle WD part 2
|
 |
Hooded Inquisitorial Interrogator
|
LOL I was talking about his HQ in the WD380 battle. Sorry.
|
If I was vain I would list stuff to make me sound good here. I decline. It's just a game after all.
House Rule -A common use of the term is to signify a deviation of game play from the official rules.
Do you allow Forgeworld 40k approved models and armies? |
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/08/24 23:48:42
Subject: Re:Sisters of Battle WD part 2
|
 |
Regular Dakkanaut
|
Yeah np I assumed that they had a different list in the new WD
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/08/25 00:00:44
Subject: Sisters of Battle WD part 2
|
 |
Hallowed Canoness
Ireland
|
So let me get this straight ... first mag has St. Celestine being an IC but S4 Arco-Flagellants, and second mag has St. Celestine not being an IC but S5 Arco-Flagellants? Can we pick and choose now?
Sheesh ... what a mess, in so many ways. Here's hoping at least the online PDF will be consistent enough to actually count as acceptable rules.
|
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2011/08/25 00:02:26
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/08/25 00:02:17
Subject: Re:Sisters of Battle WD part 2
|
 |
Nasty Nob
|
i'm not positive, and I'm certainly not suggesting that WD pays any attention to proofreading, but given that he talks about "starting a command squad", "getting another squad finished", and Saint Celestine, might the picture simply be of those models? The command squad he is starting, the squad he is wanting to finish, and Saint Celestine. It's entirely possible that this is just a group shot of "what I'm working on right now". Maybe none of those projects are finished, but it's certainly not iron-clad evidence that he's building an illegal command squad.
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/08/25 00:02:42
Subject: Re:Sisters of Battle WD part 2
|
 |
Painlord Titan Princeps of Slaanesh
|
Pyriel- wrote:
I know what you mean. I simply state the obvious, we all (most of us) thought the GKs were trashed with the removal of a lot of special rules, think of the shrouding when it was taken away, how on earth would the GK be able to survive against all those russ pancakes all of a sudden etc....
See, I thought anyone who saw the GK codex immediately recognized how powerful it is. I have seen the SoB codex and I think we 'know' about 90% of what it is and it is in no danger of being called powerful...
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/08/25 00:08:01
Subject: Sisters of Battle WD part 2
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
GW wants you to buy SoB models.....so Im pretty sure they will be competitive regardless.
|
5000+ pts. Eldar 2500pts
"The only thing that match's the Eldar's firepower, is their arrogance".
8th General at Alamo GT 2011.
Tied 2nd General Alamo GT 2012
Top General Lower Bracket Railhead 2011
Top General Railhead 2012
# of Local Tournaments Won: 4
28-9-1 In Tournaments As Eldar.
Maintained a 75% Win Ratio As Eldar in 5th Edition GT's.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/08/25 00:11:43
Subject: Sisters of Battle WD part 2
|
 |
Hooded Inquisitorial Interrogator
|
I have both mags making the complete codex.
With the mistakes apparent between the 2 magazines alone, never mind how badly Sisters have been torn up I plan on getting a list of the GW board of Directors and their addresses.
Not to ask them to fix it, I know GW could care less, but to point out how embarrassing it must be to them to be on the board for a company that is making itself a laughingstock in the industry and to have their name associated with it.
It might be enough to get the author of this mess canned at least.
|
If I was vain I would list stuff to make me sound good here. I decline. It's just a game after all.
House Rule -A common use of the term is to signify a deviation of game play from the official rules.
Do you allow Forgeworld 40k approved models and armies? |
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/08/25 00:14:36
Subject: Sisters of Battle WD part 2
|
 |
Executing Exarch
|
Smitty0305 wrote:GW wants you to buy SoB models.....so Im pretty sure they will be competitive regardless.
Only in a general "we'd like you to spend your money on our products instead of someone else's products" sense.
Sisters are horribly over-priced, and you can only get them via special order through GW's website or a GW store (once again, via special order). Your local non- GW store can't get them at all. Or in other words, you pay too much money for them (relative to everything else that GW sells) and you have to jump through hoops in order to buy them. That's not exactly the kind of attitude that you expect a company to take with product that they really want you to buy.
|
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2011/08/25 00:15:38
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/08/25 00:15:17
Subject: Sisters of Battle WD part 2
|
 |
Hooded Inquisitorial Interrogator
|
This codex is not competitive. No one will be going to stores to buy models to play this codex, and I have been playing it since the last codex came out.
They will have to FAQ the 2 magazines just so the codex can be played in a tourny.
|
If I was vain I would list stuff to make me sound good here. I decline. It's just a game after all.
House Rule -A common use of the term is to signify a deviation of game play from the official rules.
Do you allow Forgeworld 40k approved models and armies? |
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/08/25 00:19:32
Subject: Re:Sisters of Battle WD part 2
|
 |
Fresh-Faced New User
|
Some notice that prevent repentias take rhino in the 2nd part? Or is confirmed that a dominion squad must be 10 sob to take 4 Speacial weapons ?
Reading the post and until know definitive points and definitive wargear im planning something like this ( about 2500 points )
HQ
-Cannoness squad command, 3 MM in Inmolator
-Celestine/Jacobus
Elite
-9 repentia and 1 mistress with rhino
-9 repentia and 1 mistress with rhino
-9 repentia and 1 mistress with rhino
-Troops
- SOB with SSV 2 Melta with rhino
- SOB with SSV 2 Melta with rhino
- SOB with SSV 2 Melta with rhino
- SOB with SSV 2 Melta with rhino
-Fast
- 5/10 Dominion with 4 Flammer/Melta in rhino/inmolator ( waiting rules and costs )
- 5/10 Dominion with 4 Flammer/Melta in rhino/inmolator ( waiting rules and costs )
- 5/10 Dominion with 4 Flammer/Melta in rhino/inmolator ( waiting rules and costs )
-Heavy
-Exorcist
-Exorcist
-Exorcist / Retri with 4 HB in Inmo
Well without cost points i know that is stupid make a list, but the brain machine must start, i have faith in the repentia if they can take rhinos to compensate the CC lack and I3 of Celestian.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/08/25 00:27:00
Subject: Re:Sisters of Battle WD part 2
|
 |
Devastating Dark Reaper
|
The only things that have me excited are Death Cult Assassins, the possibility of Repentia in vehicles, and Celestine. Seraphim might be sick with their low points cost. Can dominions scout in vehicles? What about running Repentia squads in Multi-Melta Immolators? 3 of those, 3 maxed out Seraphim squads, Celestine, and some troops. It almost sounds like fun.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/08/25 00:27:24
Subject: Re:Sisters of Battle WD part 2
|
 |
Hooded Inquisitorial Interrogator
|
Repentia - to paraphrase an old movie.. Rhino...we don't need no stinking Rhino.
See no mention of it for them and transports look to be all dedicated....
|
If I was vain I would list stuff to make me sound good here. I decline. It's just a game after all.
House Rule -A common use of the term is to signify a deviation of game play from the official rules.
Do you allow Forgeworld 40k approved models and armies? |
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/08/25 00:29:16
Subject: Re:Sisters of Battle WD part 2
|
 |
Devastating Dark Reaper
|
I just wish Immolators and Exorcists weren't in the same foc slot.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/08/25 00:32:06
Subject: Sisters of Battle WD part 2
|
 |
Hooded Inquisitorial Interrogator
|
Or is confirmed that a dominion squad must be 10 sob to take 4 Special weapons?
Confirmed
|
If I was vain I would list stuff to make me sound good here. I decline. It's just a game after all.
House Rule -A common use of the term is to signify a deviation of game play from the official rules.
Do you allow Forgeworld 40k approved models and armies? |
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/08/25 00:33:34
Subject: Sisters of Battle WD part 2
|
 |
Hallowed Canoness
Ireland
|
Truth be told ... I can see why transports for Repentia would be nice, but I really don't think it would suit their fluff. The difficulty of fielding Repentia should be addressed differently (read, special rules) rather than with transports.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/08/25 00:40:37
Subject: Sisters of Battle WD part 2
|
 |
Devastating Dark Reaper
|
Lynata wrote:Truth be told ... I can see why transports for Repentia would be nice, but I really don't think it would suit their fluff. The difficulty of fielding Repentia should be addressed differently (read, special rules) rather than with transports.
They have to get to the battlefield somehow. It's not like they walk all the way out there to begin with; what's to stop their transport from taking them another 36 inches?
|
|
|
 |
 |
|
|