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.

 BBAP wrote:
Right, but would that change even if GW pushed Sisters harder? They're not a very exciting army to play - they're solid, reliable performers who always give a good account of themselves, but their options are limited and they only really do one thing well (mid-range light mech). That's not the kind of army you can sell to new players. If you want to change that, you need a full reboot of the faction and its fluff, which costs money. You'd need to justify that expense, which you could do if all the existing players who say they'd play Sisters "if only" are serious, but I don't think they are.

So, we are where we are.

If they pushed them they could be exciting - the many (and not so varied) marine armies are pretty similar - it is only relatively recently they have suddenly had an explosion of flavour units - like wolf men riding wolves holding wolf blades etc.

re cost of new range: I think that's a astraw man given that we have recently had Genestealer Cults, Deathwatch, Harlequins, Sisters of Silence, Custodians as well as a half hearted attempt at Adeptus Mechanicus

It would seem logical to keep adding new and different armies and units rather than either slightly different coloured marines or ones with outrageous "flavour units.

Again and again we go back to - if you make cool stuff and give it cool rules - people will buy it.

If they had made plastic Dominions, made them a bit cheaper (in price and pts) and then added the usual formation cheese on top - how many competitive players would have bought them?

Exactly. You can't just say sisters are boring and that's why nobody buys them as justification for GW not to sell them. It's GW's fault they seem boring in the first place. Again, if they put forth any effort...people would buy them. In my opnion Space marines are so much more boring than Sisters, but those sell in droves. Why? GW has poured all their money into them. Sisters would see sales with a rework and halfway decent models.

 mmzero252 wrote:
Exactly. You can't just say sisters are boring and that's why nobody buys them as justification for GW not to sell them. It's GW's fault they seem boring in the first place. Again, if they put forth any effort...people would buy them. In my opnion Space marines are so much more boring than Sisters, but those sell in droves. Why? GW has poured all their money into them. Sisters would see sales with a rework and halfway decent models.

Forum Rule... Don't Feed the Trolls. You are feeding the Trolls... stop it!
It is easy for them to target those who are excited by any sisters news or speculation.

 mmzero252 wrote:
Exactly. You can't just say sisters are boring and that's why nobody buys them as justification for GW not to sell them. It's GW's fault they seem boring in the first place. Again, if they put forth any effort...people would buy them. In my opnion Space marines are so much more boring than Sisters, but those sell in droves. Why? GW has poured all their money into them. Sisters would see sales with a rework and halfway decent models.

It's not that Sisters are "boring" - it's that they have very few options when it comes to how you run the army. With Sisters you either put a few girls in a metal box and give them special weapons, or you take lots of girls in big squads with heavy weapons. The latter isn't a good idea because it's a lot of eggs in a basket that sucks in CC and is Sweep-able, whereas the former isn't a good way to run an army in 7th Edition. Those are, however, your only options.

On the other hand, as a Space Marines player you have tonnes of options for army builds, plus tonnes more in the various supplements that are released every 10 days. You can build almost any kind of army you want, that plays however you want it to play, with all the gimmicks and toys of the universe, and you're not denied access to any of the other stuff you could've had instead. That's a much easier sell to new players than "here's six Immolators and 30 Battle Sisters, push them around the table and shoot stuff".

We agree that GW hasn't put enough effort into making the Sisters dynamic, and that it could easily be done. That requires GW to spend money though, and they're not going to do that unless the return can justify the investment, either by convincing existing players to start a new army or by helping GW attract new players to the game. Making the Sisters more dynamic without screwing up the faction would require a serious overhaul, and unless it's done properly I doubt it would convince enough existing players to switch - despite what people say, old sculpts and high cost aren't the only things keeping people from playing Sisters.

The question then becomes, could Sisters of Battle help GW attract more players to the game if they were pushed a bit harder? I think they probably could. That's not what GW is doing, however, so ho hum.

 BBAP wrote:
...It's not that Sisters are "boring" - it's that they have very few options when it comes to how you run the army. With Sisters you either put a few girls in a metal box and give them special weapons, or you take lots of girls in big squads with heavy weapons. The latter isn't a good idea because it's a lot of eggs in a basket that sucks in CC and is Sweep-able, whereas the former isn't a good way to run an army in 7th Edition. Those are, however, your only options...

I could say the same of GK, Harlequins, Skitarii, KDK, MT...pretty much everyone that isn't a big main-sequence book or the Deathwatch. Sisters are far from alone in having poor internal balance or limited options (and at least they've got HQ choices and multiple options in some slots so they don't need to take exactly the same units in exactly the same proportions the way Harlequins do).

 BBAP wrote:

 mmzero252 wrote:
Exactly. You can't just say sisters are boring and that's why nobody buys them as justification for GW not to sell them. It's GW's fault they seem boring in the first place. Again, if they put forth any effort...people would buy them. In my opnion Space marines are so much more boring than Sisters, but those sell in droves. Why? GW has poured all their money into them. Sisters would see sales with a rework and halfway decent models.

It's not that Sisters are "boring" - it's that they have very few options when it comes to how you run the army. With Sisters you either put a few girls in a metal box and give them special weapons, or you take lots of girls in big squads with heavy weapons. The latter isn't a good idea because it's a lot of eggs in a basket that sucks in CC and is Sweep-able, whereas the former isn't a good way to run an army in 7th Edition. Those are, however, your only options.

On the other hand, as a Space Marines player you have tonnes of options for army builds, plus tonnes more in the various supplements that are released every 10 days. You can build almost any kind of army you want, that plays however you want it to play, with all the gimmicks and toys of the universe, and you're not denied access to any of the other stuff you could've had instead. That's a much easier sell to new players than "here's six Immolators and 30 Battle Sisters, push them around the table and shoot stuff".

We agree that GW hasn't put enough effort into making the Sisters dynamic, and that it could easily be done. That requires GW to spend money though, and they're not going to do that unless the return can justify the investment, either by convincing existing players to start a new army or by helping GW attract new players to the game. Making the Sisters more dynamic without screwing up the faction would require a serious overhaul, and unless it's done properly I doubt it would convince enough existing players to switch - despite what people say, old sculpts and high cost aren't the only things keeping people from playing Sisters.

The question then becomes, could Sisters of Battle help GW attract more players to the game if they were pushed a bit harder? I think they probably could. That's not what GW is doing, however, so ho hum.

By that (I would contend) flawed reasoning - GW should not have made anything other than Marines - and yet we have recently we have brand new Harlequins, Genstealer Cults, Ad Mech etc.

GW did not have to spend money to give Sisters formations - a few minutes is all they usually spend on these things. They could have done this in Shield of Baal when they actually spent money on commissioned artwork and fluff writing - but no rules - for no reason.

 AnomanderRake wrote:
I could say the same of GK, Harlequins, Skitarii, KDK, MT...pretty much everyone that isn't a big main-sequence book or the Deathwatch.

Right. Which is why GW don't use those factions to sell the game. They use Spice Maroons, because they have lots of toys and options that will appeal to new players and help them shift models.

As an aside, Harlequins seem like a textbook example of the risks inherent in trying to design an army that will sell to existing players. Brand new sculpts, brand new units, all kinds of hype and fanfare - then the Codex sucks. It sucks so hard you can't even take Harlies as Allies without damaging your army's effectiveness. That's a massive shame. The models are gorgeous and they deserve better rules.

 BBAP wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:
I could say the same of GK, Harlequins, Skitarii, KDK, MT...pretty much everyone that isn't a big main-sequence book or the Deathwatch.

Right. Which is why GW don't use those factions to sell the game. They use Spice Maroons, because they have lots of toys and options that will appeal to new players and help them shift models.

As an aside, Harlequins seem like a textbook example of the risks inherent in trying to design an army that will sell to existing players. Brand new sculpts, brand new units, all kinds of hype and fanfare - then the Codex sucks. It sucks so hard you can't even take Harlies as Allies without damaging your army's effectiveness. That's a massive shame. The models are gorgeous and they deserve better rules.

'Spice Maroons' are also designed to be cheap to start and easy to paint. GW tries to push whatever's new with more powerful rules, it's just that Space Marines are new more frequently.

As an aside to the aside Harlequins are a key ingredient in the Ld-shenanigans-stacking list that makes everything the other guy's got s**t their pants and run for the hills (and can RFP Wraithknights with no save and no chance of failure), a reasonable excuse for the power of some of the Eldar book ("I need a crutch to prop up the Harlequins!"), and otherwise mostly odd.

 Mr Morden wrote:
By that (I would contend) flawed reasoning - GW should not have made anything other than Marines

Not sure how you reached that conclusion. GW use Marines to sell the game to new players and impulse-buyers; they bring in the best return, so they get the most investment. The other factions add variety; they generally sell to existing players or people who've done a bit of reading around, which is a smaller return, hence less investment overall.

GW did not have to spend money to give Sisters formations - a few minutes is all they usually spend on these things.

Even supposing the person writing the Codex is on an hourly rate, he/she has to stop whatever else they're doing and come up with a Formation that is game-legal and uses units from the Codex. That's GW spending money - or rather **wasting** money, since it isn't likely to fix the Sisters and hence isn't likely to attract new buyers for the old sculpts. That's why so little changed between 5th and 6th Ed. I'm not even sure why they bothered to be honest.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AnomanderRake wrote:
As an aside to the aside Harlequins are a key ingredient in the Ld-shenanigans-stacking list that makes everything the other guy's got s**t their pants and run for the hills (and can RFP Wraithknights with no save and no chance of failure), a reasonable excuse for the power of some of the Eldar book ("I need a crutch to prop up the Harlequins!"), and otherwise mostly odd.

That's less a "crutch", more a prosthetic leg. I've never seen the Ld-stacking-shenanigans list, but if it calls for Harlequins it's probably an expensive, fragile shenanigan, especially now Veil of Tears isn't an auto-bubble anymore.

 BBAP wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:
As an aside to the aside Harlequins are a key ingredient in the Ld-shenanigans-stacking list that makes everything the other guy's got s**t their pants and run for the hills (and can RFP Wraithknights with no save and no chance of failure), a reasonable excuse for the power of some of the Eldar book ("I need a crutch to prop up the Harlequins!"), and otherwise mostly odd.

That's less a "crutch", more a prosthetic leg. I've never seen the Ld-stacking-shenanigans list, but if it calls for Harlequins it's probably an expensive, fragile shenanigan, especially now Veil of Tears isn't an auto-bubble anymore.

It's more comedic than powerful given how unreliable/expensive it is (it takes in excess of 500pts and you need a specific set of 3-4 powers off of three different disciplines); you need a Mask of Secrets Shadowseer, an Armour of Misery DE HQ (with a Webway portal for delivery, most likely), and a Seer Council. Plonk it next to a deathstar you don't like and it's passively at -4Ld, add a cast of Horrify and you've now got a Ld 3 (at most) enemy unit. Mirror of Minds auto-RFPs a chosen model (since you keep rolling until the other guy's d6+3 result is higher than your d6+10 result you just keep going until he's dead, no matter how many saves he makes), and Fearless/ATSKNF doesn't affect Dominate so they'll need to roll a 3 or under on 2d6 to do anything.

That requires GW to spend money though, and they're not going to do that unless the return can justify the investment, either by convincing existing players to start a new army or by helping GW attract new players to the game

As we keep saying - exactly as they did with Genestealers, Harlequins, Ad Mech - if they did that with those - which were as big or more of a risk why not Sisters?

Also they plough the vast majority of the resources into Marines - which is a major reason they sell wellm, when makes them spend more time on them , and guess what they sell more - its a circle. GW are cashing in on their IP at their moment - all the good old stuff - and hopefully (apparently) doing well.

Even supposing the person writing the Codex is on an hourly rate, he/she has to stop whatever else they're doing and come up with a Formation that is game-legal and uses units from the Codex. That's GW spending money - or rather **wasting** money, since it isn't likely to fix the Sisters and hence isn't likely to attract new buyers for the old sculpts. That's why so little changed between 5th and 6th Ed. I'm not even sure why they bothered to be honest.

Again ten minutes given they don't care about balance and as I said they already spent much much more on the new artwork and large amount of fluff writing about the Sisters - it made Zero sense to then not give new rules - esp when a new fluff Special character is clearly based on a current model.

Yes in fact formations might have helped sell to more competitive players - some of the SOB units were strong before the 7.5 cheese dexes - dominions were envied by those Marine players who played against them - 4 melta guns in a scouting vehicle with its own MM and they can ignore cover.

Add in a formation that say allows re-rolls to hit and auto pass AOF and they start to become more like the cheese units that sell so well.

Give St Celestine Eternal Warrior

etc etc.

Not sure I actually like the way the AoF changed over time from how they were in WH. Would be nice if it went back a bit to where it's a set of powers and you have faith points generated by the superiors to use for it. The rolling higher or lower was a bit of burden of knowledge but not that bad if you played against sisters often enough. Kind of similar a little to how psykers work now, but to me it felt more useful for the sisters to basically pray depending on the situation rather than the tacked on special rules each unit has now instead.

I like the flavor of Sisters having special and heavy weapons almost everywhere. That does mean, however, that we are usually spending twice the cost of the model on weapons for her. *shrug*
The one turn powers... weak. It leaves the sisters overcosted. I liked how the WD codex worked... as long as you were playing with less than 750 points of sisters. Scaling the number of points would have been clunky, but better than this.

When it comes to SoB I think their faith and powers through miracles and such should be a persistent ability that situationally gets better as things turn more dire... making them into a force you can't count out in the late game.

Bikes and twin linked flamers!

Bikes and twin linked meltas!

Attack bikes with Multi-Melta!

Attack bikes with torrent Heavy Flamer!

 Mr Morden wrote:
As we keep saying - exactly as they did with Genestealers, Harlequins, Ad Mech - if they did that with those - which were as big or more of a risk why not Sisters?

Were they as big of a risk? There's always been a big demand for official AdMech stuff as far as I remember, and the Genestealer Cult are older than the hills, they just haven't had a Codex since 2nd Edition. Everyone who's been playing for any length of time remembers that ridiculous limo (which they replaced with Tonka trucks - I want my limo, damnit!).

Sisters, on the other hand, have always just sort of... been there. The people who play them are really ardent devotees, but despite that there's never really been much demand for them. It's growing, which is good, but still. To my mind, the only one of those armies where the risk is comparable would be Harlequins - that needed to be built from scratch with new sculpts and rules and everything, and given how dross that Codex was, I'm pretty sure it never made its money back. Why would GW risk that happening again?

To be honest I'm finding it hard to be unhappy with what we've got here. Old-school 3rd Ed Inquisition armies were a ton of fun to play, and if they bring that back I'll be happy enough. if there's a bit of competitive steel down the spine I'll be even happier.

Also they plough the vast majority of the resources into Marines - which is a major reason they sell wellm, when makes them spend more time on them , and guess what they sell more - its a circle.

That's not how I see it. GW uses Marines to push the game; they're the poster boys, so they get the most investment. They sell more because they're actively promoted to curious browsers. You disagree. Neither of us know for sure.

GW are cashing in on their IP at their moment - all the good old stuff - and hopefully (apparently) doing well.

Yeah... apparently. Far as I know their bottom line has recovered to the same place it was in 2011 after a few years of shrinkage. I don't even think they paid a share dividend in 2013/14. That's a story for another time, though.

Again ten minutes given they don't care about balance

That's not how you run a business. If you're paying someone for that ten minutes, you want ten minutes' productive work out of it. The rest of the Codex was more or less a cut and paste job; they shuffled some deckchairs around and incorporated some stuff from FW rulesets, just enough to make it different enough from the WD centrefold that you'd have to buy it to play Sisters, but that was all they did. It was all they needed to do. It wasn't done to sell Sisters - it was done to rake in a bit of cash from people who already own the army and want to keep playing it.

and as I said they already spent much much more on the new artwork and large amount of fluff writing about the Sisters - it made Zero sense to then not give new rules - esp when a new fluff Special character is clearly based on a current model.

Who's the "new" fluff special character you're referring to? It's not Jacobus - he was in the 2nd Edition Codex, if I remember right. They chucked him because he was worthless, and because they needed to fit the Ordo hereticus units in somewhere. Celestine was in the 3rd Edition book.

Yes in fact formations might have helped sell to more competitive players - some of the SOB units were strong before the 7.5 cheese dexes

They still are. I'd take Battle Sisters, Dominions and Retributors as Allies any day of the week, TLMM Immolators are a bargain, and Saint Celestine is pretty amazing for her points. As a whole though, the army hasn't been strong since The Cruddening in 5th Edition.

Give St Celestine Eternal Warrior

Everyone says this, but I don't think people appreciate just what an absolute monster Celestine is already. Jump Infantry (so 12" move per turn and no way to block her with transports etc.), Hit and Run (immune to clogging), six attacks on the charge, hitting most everything on a 3+ thanks to WS7, killing most everything on a 3+ thanks to S5 AP3 (which is high enough to reliably hurt most vehicles), almost always striking first thanks to I7 and grenades (so half your squad is dead before they even get to swing back). Defensively she has a HF for Overwatch, five attacks at I7, a 2+/4++ save, and even supposing you manage to kill her she comes back from the dead with all of her wounds restored if she passes her AoF on Ld10... and now you want to give her full immunity to powerfists, instead of just the partial immunity she already has? She's undercosted as it is - you stick EW in there and she'd need to cost 200-odd points.

 Anpu-adom wrote:
I like the flavor of Sisters having special and heavy weapons almost everywhere. That does mean, however, that we are usually spending twice the cost of the model on weapons for her. *shrug*

I agree that the $ 16-ish Heavy / Special models are fairly priced at twice the cost of the $8 basic Sister. Pushing more of the $16 models per squad is good for GW's bottom line.

I was tossing ideas around with my brother and this occurred to me....
What if Sisters don't get the Rhino?
Hold on with me.
The rest of their vehicles could be based on the Chimera instead. Repressor... on Chimera frame. Immolator... on Chimera frame... Exerorcist... on Chimera frame.

It would be distinct from the Space Marines, tie it closer to the rest of the Inquisition.

 BBAP wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:
As we keep saying - exactly as they did with Genestealers, Harlequins, Ad Mech - if they did that with those - which were as big or more of a risk why not Sisters?

Were they as big of a risk? There's always been a big demand for official AdMech stuff as far as I remember, and the Genestealer Cult are older than the hills, they just haven't had a Codex since 2nd Edition. Everyone who's been playing for any length of time remembers that ridiculous limo (which they replaced with Tonka trucks - I want my limo, damnit!).

Sisters, on the other hand, have always just sort of... been there. The people who play them are really ardent devotees, but despite that there's never really been much demand for them. It's growing, which is good, but still. To my mind, the only one of those armies where the risk is comparable would be Harlequins - that needed to be built from scratch with new sculpts and rules and everything, and given how dross that Codex was, I'm pretty sure it never made its money back. Why would GW risk that happening again?

To be honest I'm finding it hard to be unhappy with what we've got here. Old-school 3rd Ed Inquisition armies were a ton of fun to play, and if they bring that back I'll be happy enough. if there's a bit of competitive steel down the spine I'll be even happier.

Also they plough the vast majority of the resources into Marines - which is a major reason they sell wellm, when makes them spend more time on them , and guess what they sell more - its a circle.

That's not how I see it. GW uses Marines to push the game; they're the poster boys, so they get the most investment. They sell more because they're actively promoted to curious browsers. You disagree. Neither of us know for sure.

GW are cashing in on their IP at their moment - all the good old stuff - and hopefully (apparently) doing well.

Yeah... apparently. Far as I know their bottom line has recovered to the same place it was in 2011 after a few years of shrinkage. I don't even think they paid a share dividend in 2013/14. That's a story for another time, though.

Again ten minutes given they don't care about balance

That's not how you run a business. If you're paying someone for that ten minutes, you want ten minutes' productive work out of it. The rest of the Codex was more or less a cut and paste job; they shuffled some deckchairs around and incorporated some stuff from FW rulesets, just enough to make it different enough from the WD centrefold that you'd have to buy it to play Sisters, but that was all they did. It was all they needed to do. It wasn't done to sell Sisters - it was done to rake in a bit of cash from people who already own the army and want to keep playing it.

and as I said they already spent much much more on the new artwork and large amount of fluff writing about the Sisters - it made Zero sense to then not give new rules - esp when a new fluff Special character is clearly based on a current model.

Who's the "new" fluff special character you're referring to? It's not Jacobus - he was in the 2nd Edition Codex, if I remember right. They chucked him because he was worthless, and because they needed to fit the Ordo hereticus units in somewhere. Celestine was in the 3rd Edition book.

Yes in fact formations might have helped sell to more competitive players - some of the SOB units were strong before the 7.5 cheese dexes

They still are. I'd take Battle Sisters, Dominions and Retributors as Allies any day of the week, TLMM Immolators are a bargain, and Saint Celestine is pretty amazing for her points. As a whole though, the army hasn't been strong since The Cruddening in 5th Edition.

Give St Celestine Eternal Warrior

Everyone says this, but I don't think people appreciate just what an absolute monster Celestine is already. Jump Infantry (so 12" move per turn and no way to block her with transports etc.), Hit and Run (immune to clogging), six attacks on the charge, hitting most everything on a 3+ thanks to WS7, killing most everything on a 3+ thanks to S5 AP3 (which is high enough to reliably hurt most vehicles), almost always striking first thanks to I7 and grenades (so half your squad is dead before they even get to swing back). Defensively she has a HF for Overwatch, five attacks at I7, a 2+/4++ save, and even supposing you manage to kill her she comes back from the dead with all of her wounds restored if she passes her AoF on Ld10... and now you want to give her full immunity to powerfists, instead of just the partial immunity she already has? She's undercosted as it is - you stick EW in there and she'd need to cost 200-odd points.

As I said GW really don't care about Balance - if they made a new St Celestine model along the lines of the main Stormcast guy - she would be undercosted / overpowered - just like all the other cool models these days - Wraithknights et al. They have a business model of "selling the models - with some rules if you want them I guess".

The new fluff character I mentioned was Cannoness Magda Grace, The Martyr Saint of Lysios who the artist obviously based on the current Cannoness model - complete with the book St. Lucius.




my version of her here http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/651855.page

Yes I agree that the current AS list is not awful, it has units that work, some as you note work very, very well - but as I said - add in the usual 7.5 edition cheese like super formations and the like and then you would see more sales.

 BBAP wrote:

Give St Celestine Eternal Warrior

Everyone says this, but I don't think people appreciate just what an absolute monster Celestine is already. Jump Infantry (so 12" move per turn and no way to block her with transports etc.), Hit and Run (immune to clogging), six attacks on the charge, hitting most everything on a 3+ thanks to WS7, killing most everything on a 3+ thanks to S5 AP3 (which is high enough to reliably hurt most vehicles), almost always striking first thanks to I7 and grenades (so half your squad is dead before they even get to swing back). Defensively she has a HF for Overwatch, five attacks at I7, a 2+/4++ save, and even supposing you manage to kill her she comes back from the dead with all of her wounds restored if she passes her AoF on Ld10... and now you want to give her full immunity to powerfists, instead of just the partial immunity she already has? She's undercosted as it is - you stick EW in there and she'd need to cost 200-odd points.

HAhAHAHAHAHahaHAHAHAHAHAH! No. At 135 points Celestine seems really good because the other HQ options are terrible, but ultimately she's still over costed for what she is, a character that dies to a wet fart and can't do anything against 2+ armor. I would say eternal warrior would put her at about 145pts if she stayed AP3. If she got bumped up to AP 2 on top of that then you'd be in the 180-190 range. Without some kind of special squad buff, she's never break 200 though. I mean CM Smashfether is only 220 for S8 Ap2 T5 Bike(Better than Jumppack) 4 attacks WS 6 4 wounds EW, +2 to FNP, 2+3++, oh and 15 more points gets you the same number of attacks at the same weapon profile as a secondary option, oh and a S10 Ap2 Large Blast. Sure, in 4th she might have been extremely powerful but in 7th she's just a useful CC character.

CM Smashfether

Is that still legal with only one relic per model? Otherwise agree re St C - she is great but either give her EW or make her AOF multi use

 Mr Morden wrote:

CM Smashfether

Is that still legal with only one relic per model? Otherwise agree re St C - she is great but either give her EW or make her AOF multi use

He only ever had 1 relic, it was MURDERWINGS that used 2. He takes the Gorgon's Chain, a powerfist and a bike and he's pretty much unstoppable outside of Dshots and Stomps. Oh IWND forgot about that too.

 Mr Morden wrote:
As I said GW really don't care about Balance - if they made a new St Celestine model along the lines of the main Stormcast guy - she would be undercosted / overpowered - just like all the other cool models these days - Wraithknights et al. They have a business model of "selling the models - with some rules if you want them I guess".

I disagree with your assessment of GW's game design policies, I disagree that Wraithknights are OP/ undercosted, and I think you're just wrong in general - but I've said all this before. I think we're done on this point.

The new fluff character I mentioned was Cannoness Magda Grace, The Martyr Saint of Lysios who the artist obviously based on the current Cannoness model - complete with the book St. Lucius

Right. Your argument is that GW spent loads of money producing this character and her artwork, hence they could've spent a bit more updating the SoB rules. What I see is some corny spiel about a woman in power armour somersaulting off a tank and one-shotting a Lictor with a bolt pistol. This was clearly written by C.S. Goto at 4:55pm on Christmas Eve. I haven't seen the artwork, but you can commission a digital artist for a couple of hundred quid per image. Paying game designers to redo a Codex is more expensive than that, whether or not you care about game balance.

Yes I agree that the current AS list is not awful, it has units that work, some as you note work very, very well - but as I said - add in the usual 7.5 edition cheese like super formations and the like and then you would see more sales.

No doubt, but would the increased sales justify the cost of redoing the Codex? That's the question I want a proper answer to. I haven't had one yet.

ERJAK wrote:
HAhAHAHAHAHahaHAHAHAHAHAH! No. At 135 points Celestine seems really good because the other HQ options are terrible

Define "terrible". The Canoness seems fine to me. A bit overpriced maybe, but she is what she is.

but ultimately she's still over costed for what she is, a character that dies to a wet fart and can't do anything against 2+ armor.

She's I7 Jump Infantry with grenades, puts out 6 S5 AP3 attacks on the charge, has a 2+/4++ save, a Heavy Flamer, and she comes back to life if she's killed. Try building that character for 135pts in any other Codex. Two wounds (to represent the chance of a Scatterlaser killing her), 2+/4++, all the other stuff Celestine has, for 135pts. Let me see it.

"Overcosted". You can fit her and some Seraphim in an army alongside 11 tanks. She's not even remotely overcosted.

I would say eternal warrior would put her at about 145pts if she stayed AP3

She comes back to life. You want a six 2+/4++ wounds on Celestine for 145pts.

No. Just no.

Celestine is not Smashfether. She's not going to kill Smashfether, or a Wraithknight, or a First Curse. She will, however, tear a big angel-shaped hole through 90-odd percent of the units in the game, including light vehicles, for 135pts. I'm happy with that. Very happy indeed. I'll take that all day long if I'm building a CC unit.

If you want Smashfether, you must pay Smashfether points.

Why is everyone getting their power armor in a bunch over this agents of the imperium book? It's going to be just like angels of death and traitors hate. It will be a collection of assorted formations and units that were previously released in independant dataslates. It will probably have all of the inquisition it, and a few select units from other factions, ie GK termies and SoB battle sisters, so you have options other than henchmen. All we can really hope for, is that it *may* have a couple new formations, but I doubt it. It looks like it's going to be the new 'Codex Inquisition', except rebranded.

 Anpu-adom wrote:
What if Sisters don't get the Rhino?

The rest of their vehicles could be based on the Chimera instead. Repressor... on Chimera frame. Immolator... on Chimera frame... Exerorcist... on Chimera frame.

It would be distinct from the Space Marines, tie it closer to the rest of the Inquisition.

If the Sisters don't get the Rhino, then they will NOT get alternate turret Chimera / Hellhound models.

Instead, they would get an all-new vehicle that is unique and distinct to the Sisters. Just as the Stormtroopers got their ridiculous new tank, and GSC got their new truck, the Sisters will get something special all to themselves. The fact that people would have to buy the official models is only a good thing for GW's revenue.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 deviantduck wrote:
Why is everyone getting their power armor in a bunch over this agents of the imperium book? It's going to be just like angels of death and traitors hate. It will be a collection of assorted formations and units that were previously released in independant dataslates. It will probably have all of the inquisition it, and a few select units from other factions, ie GK termies and SoB battle sisters, so you have options other than henchmen. All we can really hope for, is that it *may* have a couple new formations, but I doubt it. It looks like it's going to be the new 'Codex Inquisition', except rebranded.

What I really hope is that Agents of the Imperium is the only Battle Brothers choice for Imperial Armies, and all others get bumped down a notch to regular Allies.

 Anpu-adom wrote:
I was tossing ideas around with my brother and this occurred to me....
What if Sisters don't get the Rhino?
Hold on with me.
The rest of their vehicles could be based on the Chimera instead. Repressor... on Chimera frame. Immolator... on Chimera frame... Exerorcist... on Chimera frame.

It would be distinct from the Space Marines, tie it closer to the rest of the Inquisition.

Doubtful. For once, i feel Hwang is rogjt. More likely sisters will get their own vehicle if we dont get the rhino.

 BBAP wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:
As I said GW really don't care about Balance - if they made a new St Celestine model along the lines of the main Stormcast guy - she would be undercosted / overpowered - just like all the other cool models these days - Wraithknights et al. They have a business model of "selling the models - with some rules if you want them I guess".

I disagree with your assessment of GW's game design policies, I disagree that Wraithknights are OP/ undercosted, and I think you're just wrong in general - but I've said all this before. I think we're done on this point.

The new fluff character I mentioned was Cannoness Magda Grace, The Martyr Saint of Lysios who the artist obviously based on the current Cannoness model - complete with the book St. Lucius

Right. Your argument is that GW spent loads of money producing this character and her artwork, hence they could've spent a bit more updating the SoB rules. What I see is some corny spiel about a woman in power armour somersaulting off a tank and one-shotting a Lictor with a bolt pistol. This was clearly written by C.S. Goto at 4:55pm on Christmas Eve. I haven't seen the artwork, but you can commission a digital artist for a couple of hundred quid per image. Paying game designers to redo a Codex is more expensive than that, whether or not you care about game balance.

Yes I agree that the current AS list is not awful, it has units that work, some as you note work very, very well - but as I said - add in the usual 7.5 edition cheese like super formations and the like and then you would see more sales.

No doubt, but would the increased sales justify the cost of redoing the Codex? That's the question I want a proper answer to. I haven't had one yet.

ERJAK wrote:
HAhAHAHAHAHahaHAHAHAHAHAH! No. At 135 points Celestine seems really good because the other HQ options are terrible

Define "terrible". The Canoness seems fine to me. A bit overpriced maybe, but she is what she is.

but ultimately she's still over costed for what she is, a character that dies to a wet fart and can't do anything against 2+ armor.

She's I7 Jump Infantry with grenades, puts out 6 S5 AP3 attacks on the charge, has a 2+/4++ save, a Heavy Flamer, and she comes back to life if she's killed. Try building that character for 135pts in any other Codex. Two wounds (to represent the chance of a Scatterlaser killing her), 2+/4++, all the other stuff Celestine has, for 135pts. Let me see it.

"Overcosted". You can fit her and some Seraphim in an army alongside 11 tanks. She's not even remotely overcosted.

I would say eternal warrior would put her at about 145pts if she stayed AP3

She comes back to life. You want a six 2+/4++ wounds on Celestine for 145pts.

No. Just no.

Celestine is not Smashfether. She's not going to kill Smashfether, or a Wraithknight, or a First Curse. She will, however, tear a big angel-shaped hole through 90-odd percent of the units in the game, including light vehicles, for 135pts. I'm happy with that. Very happy indeed. I'll take that all day long if I'm building a CC unit.

If you want Smashfether, you must pay Smashfether points.

1. The canoness is about 45 points more expensive than she should be. Pretty much the only thing you're paying for is LD 10 and the ability to take wargear. She's irrelevant in CC and only funcitonally has 1 wound if you don't buy the 25 point EW upgrade.
2. I don't have to build that character for any other codex because the vast majority of other codex have better options. Eldar take scatt bikes or warps spiders, SM take 4 grav Cannons, Necrons take a decent buffing HQ, all the good books in the game have a better way of spending 135 points for a models that might take out one squad of tactical marines.
3. You pretty much get locked into taking seraphim who are fine, but are not going to do much other than bodyblock for celestine against most meta/semi-meta armies. They're very similar in power (+-8%) assault marines and no one takes those either.
4. Culexus assasin is 140pts and not only beats Celestine in CC 50-60% of the time but has INSANE utility compared to her.
5. Overcosted doesn't mean 'can't fit her in' it mean 'Can get better value elsewhere' and to be frank, most of the good codexes can. 1 Thunderwolf with a +1 S weapon and a SS beats her in combat pretty much every time.
6. I'm not saying she's not good, she is, for about half the codexes in the game she'd be really awesome; BUT that doesn't change the fact that if she was in Eldar, Chaose Demons, Space Wolves, Space Marines, Necrons, Chaos renegades, Dark Angels, WarCon, or Tau, the only time you'd ever see her is if if they need hit and run for something.

She's a close combat beatstick that dies to a stiff breeze and CAN FAIL her get-back-up, in an era where CC beatstick models are for TANKING rather than doing damage. Ultimately she's fine but she could be better without ever reaching broken.

ERJAK wrote:
1. The canoness is about 45 points more expensive than she should be. Pretty much the only thing you're paying for is LD 10 and the ability to take wargear. She's irrelevant in CC and only funcitonally has 1 wound if you don't buy the 25 point EW upgrade.

I don't disagree - she's a cheap minimum HQ with no utility, so she should cost less. As it stands reducing her price wouldn't really allow me to bring anything I don't already have in spades, so I'm fine with it.

2. I don't have to build that character for any other codex because the vast majority of other codex have better options.Eldar take scatt bikes or warps spiders, SM take 4 grav Cannons, Necrons take a decent buffing HQ, all the good books in the game have a better way of spending 135 points for a models that might take out one squad of tactical marines.

You're trying to shift the goalposts here. Of course there are "better" ways to spend 135pts than Celestine - but there are "better" ways to spend 220pts than powerfist Smashfether. Point is, for what Celestine gives you, she's worth paying for, and if you want utility then she's got more of that than Smashfether.

3. You pretty much get locked into taking seraphim who are fine, but are not going to do much other than bodyblock for celestine against most meta/semi-meta armies. They're very similar in power (+-8%) assault marines and no one takes those either.

I'm not "locked" into anything. I can run her in a unit of Seraphim if I like, or I can not do that. I can DS her in front of an opponent so he kills her - then she comes back next turn and removes one of his squads from play. Or maybe he doesn't kill her and she removes two of his squads. That also works if you run her on her own; whatever is shooting at her isn't shooting at the rest of your army.

I can also bring her as part of an Invisible deathstar so the whole unit gets HnR and can reroll charges if she walks. I can DS her for an all-but guaranteed Electrodisplacement - kill her if you like, she'll come back from the dead next turn and then I'm in your backline. I can split her off from the deathstar to either kill or soften up stuff like Genestealers - which she can hold her own against, unlike most 135pt ICs - or grab objectives without having to break up Conclaves etc.

There's tonnes of stuff you can do with her. She's a steal for what she costs.

4. Culexus assasin is 140pts and not only beats Celestine in CC 50-60% of the time but has INSANE utility compared to her.

Against Invisible deathstars he has "INSANE utility". Against anyone else he's about as good as Celestine, except he doesn't come back from the dead and can be boxed off by transports. There's nothing sadder than watching a Culexus walking his Lycra ass all the way around a pair of Rhinos, stopping occasionally to plink away with his sad little Speculum and mabye kicking the back doors really hard to no noticeable effect. Celestine just glides right over that nonsense.

Again though, it's not an either-or. If you have a need you can bring them both.

5. Overcosted doesn't mean 'can't fit her in' it mean 'Can get better value elsewhere'

If we're talking in general terms then yeah, I could swap Celestine for a Subterranean Uprising or a Leman Russ Vanquisher or anything else that would make more sense in whatever army I'm running. What I'm saying is that Celestine really isn't a bad way to spend 135pts if you have a need, especially considering what you get.

1 Thunderwolf with a +1 S weapon and a SS beats her in combat pretty much every time.

So don't charge her at Thunderwolves. You're not bringing Celestine to have one-on-one fights with souped-up melee ICs or tough . You're bringing her to carve up infantry and do tricks. She can do that just fine.

6. I'm not saying she's not good, she is, for about half the codexes in the game she'd be really awesome; BUT that doesn't change the fact that if she was in Eldar, Chaose Demons, Space Wolves, Space Marines, Necrons, Chaos renegades, Dark Angels, WarCon, or Tau, the only time you'd ever see her is if if they need hit and run for something.

Indeed - but Smashfether wouldn't fit in many of those lists either unless they were built around him. I'm not saying she's an auto-include. I'm saying for what she costs, she's worth bringing.

She's a close combat beatstick that dies to a stiff breeze and CAN FAIL her get-back-up, in an era where CC beatstick models are for TANKING rather than doing damage. Ultimately she's fine but she could be better without ever reaching broken.

I don't disagree with any of this - in fact at the start of this exchange I was the one saying "she's fine", whereas you were the one saying she's overcosted or whatever. I don't disagree that she could be better - but she's plenty nasty as she is. She doesn't need to be better, and if she was better she'd need to cost more points.

I'm not understanding how giving a unit a ton of 2+/4++ saves that one can LOS off onto a scrub isn't a bad thing for 135 pts.

I'm looking at running Celestine with 2 Death Company Chaplains and a squad of Death Company in their new formation. Should be fun.