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.

 AnomanderRake wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
book is good

book is F***ING s***

wow you mad

the_scotsman wrote:
...actually...no, there aren't. The Aquila Doctrine is reroll 1s to wound/pen. Mission Tactics (which they do also get) are reroll 1s to hit vs a force org slot, which IIRC you pick when you arrive and cannot change unless you take a watch commander or a deathwatch detachment of some sort or something.

The only difference between the Kill Team presented in codex: IA and codex: Deathwatch is the dedicated transport options.

Clarification for those confused by this whole clusterf***: For reasons known only to GW the phrase "Kill-Team" refers now to the "Deathwatch Kill-Team" detachment in the Imperial Agents book, the lore concept of a "Deathwatch Kill-Team", the 3rd edition "Deathwatch Kill-Team" White Dwarf supplemental unit that was a precursor to Sternguard and the modern Deathwatch Codex, the "Kill-Team" game mode for small armies and its historical precursors and third-party variants, the 2011 THQ 3rd-person-shooter "Warhammer 40,000: Kill Team", the Last Chancers novel "Kill Team" by Gav Thorpe (which has exactly nothing to do with the Deathwatch), the "Kill-Team" non-formation element of the Black Spear Strike Force, and the Aquila, Furor, Venator, Dominatus, Malleus, and Purgatus Kill-Team formations in Codex: Deathwatch, whose eponymous Aquila/Furor/Venator/etc. Doctrine special rules should not be confused with the Furor/Venator/Dominatus/etc. Tactics rules granted as part of the Mission Tactics special rule.

And funnily enough exactly none of the things the phrase "Kill-Team" refers to is the "Deathwatch Veterans" unit that is shared between the Deathwatch and Imperial Agents Codexes, which gives me yet more cause to question whether you've actually read either one.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 axisofentropy wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
book is good

book is F***ING s***

wow you mad

Gee. Ya think?

Some mad dude wrote:

Joakero haven't changed in the slightest. I have no idea what this 'substantial buff' is.

Yes they have. I hate it when people speak in absolutes and they are wrong. It makes me as mad as a bad codex release for my Sisters. Wait.. what was it?

"I wish you would read the rules for Monkeys and not simply opine on it."

Here it is, your highness.

Old Monkeys...


Roll a D6 for every unit containing a Jokaero and add 1 for every extra Jokaero in the unit you may have taken:
1 - Aesthetic Alteration: Jack gak. I hope you took at least 2 Jokaero to a unit, or you're one unlucky sod.
2 - Improved Gun Sights: All weapons in the unit gain +12" Range. Awesome with most any weapons but meltas and hotshot lasguns benefit the most.
3 - Reinforced Armor: +1 to the unit's armor saves. Now your Power Armored Inquisitor/Acolytes may as well be wearing Artificer armor.
4 - Penetrating Ammunition: The Unit's shooting weapons gain the Rending special rule. This would be why you want a lot of storm bolters. You've seen what Eldar infantry can do, well, now you can do it too. But better.
5 - Augmentative Energy Shields: 5++ blanket Invuln for the unit. One of the only ways to get an Invulnerable save on an Inquisitor. Fantastic if you have Arco-flagellants.
6 - The Works: roll twice more on the table, ignoring duplicates and more sixes.

Take a good, hard look at the "add 1 for every extra Jokaero" rule and the results from a roll of 6 on the old monkeys. If you rolled 6 twice, you were screwed. You could get two upgrades, or 0.

New Monkeys reworded number 6.

6 - The Works: Pick two results from the first 5 choices. Each result can only be applied once.


So yea, they changed. Good job fact checking.

 Thunderfrog wrote:
...So yea, they changed. Good job fact checking.

Cool. Now go play an army with more than two of these 35pt single-Wound T3 fluffballs in a squad. With your 2.5x-cost Divination psykers, 2-firepoint transports, and Inquisitor-per-squad tax instead of Inquisitor-per-three tax.

Once you've gotten tabled a few times come back and explain the 'substantial buff' in more detail.

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 Thunderfrog wrote:
...So yea, they changed. Good job fact checking.

Cool. Now go play an army with more than two of these 35pt single-Wound T3 fluffballs in a squad. With your 2.5x-cost Divination psykers, 2-firepoint transports, and Inquisitor-per-squad tax instead of Inquisitor-per-three tax.

Once you've gotten tabled a few times come back and explain the 'substantial buff' in more detail.

I'm not trying to change your opinion nor will I reach for your changing goal posts.

You stated in absolutes that they were unchanged in the middle of your nihilist rant. I just wanted to tell you that you were, in absolute terms, wrong. They did change.

 Thunderfrog wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 Thunderfrog wrote:
...So yea, they changed. Good job fact checking.

Cool. Now go play an army with more than two of these 35pt single-Wound T3 fluffballs in a squad. With your 2.5x-cost Divination psykers, 2-firepoint transports, and Inquisitor-per-squad tax instead of Inquisitor-per-three tax.

Once you've gotten tabled a few times come back and explain the 'substantial buff' in more detail.

I'm not trying to change your opinion nor will I reach for your changing goal posts.

You stated in absolutes that they were unchanged in the middle of your nihilist rant. I just wanted to tell you that you were, in absolute terms, wrong. They did change.

We're hopping back and forth between definitions here. Yes, Joakero have technically changed. For every practical consideration, and in every way that matters to how they're used in the game, they've remained unchanged or gotten worse. But the words in the unit entry have changed. Woo.

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 Thunderfrog wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 Thunderfrog wrote:
...So yea, they changed. Good job fact checking.

Cool. Now go play an army with more than two of these 35pt single-Wound T3 fluffballs in a squad. With your 2.5x-cost Divination psykers, 2-firepoint transports, and Inquisitor-per-squad tax instead of Inquisitor-per-three tax.

Once you've gotten tabled a few times come back and explain the 'substantial buff' in more detail.

I'm not trying to change your opinion nor will I reach for your changing goal posts.

You stated in absolutes that they were unchanged in the middle of your nihilist rant. I just wanted to tell you that you were, in absolute terms, wrong. They did change.

We're hopping back and forth between definitions here. Yes, Joakero have technically changed. For every practical consideration, and in every way that matters to how they're used in the game, they've remained unchanged or gotten worse. But the words in the unit entry have changed. Woo.

It's not a simple wording change. Their gameplay effect has changed. You can no longer get stuck with no upgrades, and can now lock yourself into two of your choice. Further, by the wording, attaching super friends IC's to a Jokearo unit is legal, and the buff stays when they leave. So you can take your 2+ armor save and leave the monkeys behind.

So you're wrong again. Did you even read their unit entry?

Yes monkeys changed and yes it was for the better. I run a 3 man inquisitor joint task force 1 for each ordos. Über broken? No, but now I'm considering monkeys in each squad where before it was no way. The choosing 2 beefs them up tremendously especially combined with cheaper armor in the acolytes. Saving on 2+ with the monkey ability and power armor and being able to almost guarantee that is pretty amazing.

jade_angel wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

Waaaghpower wrote:
Seraphim got better, unless you took them with Celestine.

What changed with them?

Their Act of Faith, though activated in the Shooting Phase, now applies for the entire turn, so they get Shred in the Assault Phase as well. This makes their melee attacks far more effective, although there's no useful way to give them Zealot/Hatred on top of that without reducing their movement to 6". (Though an allied psyker could throw Prescience on them, just like always.)

Oh, yeah. Given GW's track record I am considering this a type unless proven otherwise. Happened before with the condemnor…

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

jade_angel wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

Waaaghpower wrote:
Seraphim got better, unless you took them with Celestine.

What changed with them?

Their Act of Faith, though activated in the Shooting Phase, now applies for the entire turn, so they get Shred in the Assault Phase as well. This makes their melee attacks far more effective, although there's no useful way to give them Zealot/Hatred on top of that without reducing their movement to 6". (Though an allied psyker could throw Prescience on them, just like always.)

Oh, yeah. Given GW's track record I am considering this a type unless proven otherwise. Happened before with the condemnor…

I'm not a very skilled player.

Are Seraphim the kind of unit you actually want to be in melee?

 Pouncey wrote:
Are Seraphim the kind of unit you actually want to be in melee?

Depends a LOT on the target. Sometimes, yes. Anything that can't do you much harm in melee you want to charge. Because then the enemy cannot shoot you, and then you Hit and Run during their turn so that you can shoot again (and charge again). However being TOO good in melee can potentially be harmful because then you kill all your opponents and the rest of the enemies can shoot you, but S3 AP- means that basically never happen…

 AnomanderRake wrote:


As a secondary problem to the factions/Henchmen warbands consider, if you will, that Acolyte squads may not take any of their Dedicated Transports other than the Chimera in the Inquisitorial Representative detachment (as per the stipulation that the detachment contain only units with the Inquisition faction), and as per the latest FAQ there is a strong argument to be made that a Henchmen Warband formation isn't actually allowed to embark on its own Dedicated Transport unless it's a Chimera and the unit doesn't include any optional additions other than Daemonhosts and Joakero.

This has been solved, go to page 120 of your BRB, go to the Dedicated Transports section, it will say this:

Big Rule Book, pg 120 wrote: Sometimes a units Army List Entry will include a Transport option, allowing a vehicle to be selected together with the unit. These Dedicated Transports do not use up a slot on the Force Orginization Chart (pg 120), but for all other rules purposes count as having the same Battlefield Role and Faction (if any) as the unit the were bought for

Emphasis mine. As i said earlier, the reason people dont know this already is because it has literally never come up before, but there it is. Any Dedicated Transport that the Inquisition Warband takes, gains their Faction.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:
Are Seraphim the kind of unit you actually want to be in melee?

Depends a LOT on the target. Sometimes, yes. Anything that can't do you much harm in melee you want to charge. Because then the enemy cannot shoot you, and then you Hit and Run during their turn so that you can shoot again (and charge again). However being TOO good in melee can potentially be harmful because then you kill all your opponents and the rest of the enemies can shoot you, but S3 AP- means that basically never happen…

They could shoot you anyways if you didn't charge though, so at least you wiped out a unit before the return fire.

Thanks for the explanation though! : D

 Grimmor wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:


As a secondary problem to the factions/Henchmen warbands consider, if you will, that Acolyte squads may not take any of their Dedicated Transports other than the Chimera in the Inquisitorial Representative detachment (as per the stipulation that the detachment contain only units with the Inquisition faction), and as per the latest FAQ there is a strong argument to be made that a Henchmen Warband formation isn't actually allowed to embark on its own Dedicated Transport unless it's a Chimera and the unit doesn't include any optional additions other than Daemonhosts and Joakero.

This has been solved, go to page 120 of your BRB, go to the Dedicated Transports section, it will say this:

Big Rule Book, pg 120 wrote: Sometimes a units Army List Entry will include a Transport option, allowing a vehicle to be selected together with the unit. These Dedicated Transports do not use up a slot on the Force Orginization Chart (pg 120), but for all other rules purposes count as having the same Battlefield Role and Faction (if any) as the unit the were bought for

Emphasis mine. As i said earlier, the reason people dont know this already is because it has literally never come up before, but there it is. Any Dedicated Transport that the Inquisition Warband takes, gains their Faction.

The Inquisition faction.

DCA, Priests, Techpriests, Crusaders, Astropaths, Sisters, GK, and Deathwatch have their own Factions. You can put a Henchmen Warband and an Inquisitor in a Valkyrie, but if the unit contains anything other than Acolytes, Inquisitors, Joakero, and Daemonhosts it can't start in its own transport.

(Unless the rule is 'must have faction X to deploy in transport of faction X' instead of 'may not deploy in transport of faction X if you are faction Y, regardless of other factions you may have', at which point you can deploy anything you want in any transport as long as you have an IC with the right faction to deploy with them. This is the issue with trying to implement a typeline in a backwards-compatible way, you end up screwing up some of the fundamental logic.)

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 Grimmor wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:


As a secondary problem to the factions/Henchmen warbands consider, if you will, that Acolyte squads may not take any of their Dedicated Transports other than the Chimera in the Inquisitorial Representative detachment (as per the stipulation that the detachment contain only units with the Inquisition faction), and as per the latest FAQ there is a strong argument to be made that a Henchmen Warband formation isn't actually allowed to embark on its own Dedicated Transport unless it's a Chimera and the unit doesn't include any optional additions other than Daemonhosts and Joakero.

This has been solved, go to page 120 of your BRB, go to the Dedicated Transports section, it will say this:

Big Rule Book, pg 120 wrote: Sometimes a units Army List Entry will include a Transport option, allowing a vehicle to be selected together with the unit. These Dedicated Transports do not use up a slot on the Force Orginization Chart (pg 120), but for all other rules purposes count as having the same Battlefield Role and Faction (if any) as the unit the were bought for

Emphasis mine. As i said earlier, the reason people dont know this already is because it has literally never come up before, but there it is. Any Dedicated Transport that the Inquisition Warband takes, gains their Faction.

The Inquisition faction.

DCA, Priests, Techpriests, Crusaders, Astropaths, Sisters, GK, and Deathwatch have their own Factions. You can put a Henchmen Warband and an Inquisitor in a Valkyrie, but if the unit contains anything other than Acolytes, Inquisitors, Joakero, and Daemonhosts it can't start in its own transport.

(Unless the rule is 'must have faction X to deploy in transport of faction X' instead of 'may not deploy in transport of faction X if you are faction Y, regardless of other factions you may have', at which point you can deploy anything you want in any transport as long as you have an IC with the right faction to deploy with them. This is the issue with trying to implement a typeline in a backwards-compatible way, you end up screwing up some of the fundamental logic.)

Well, the Warband is a single unit correct? And the Warband bought the Valkyrie, right? So, by the rules, it has every model's Faction, as idiotic as that is.

 Grimmor wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 Grimmor wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:


As a secondary problem to the factions/Henchmen warbands consider, if you will, that Acolyte squads may not take any of their Dedicated Transports other than the Chimera in the Inquisitorial Representative detachment (as per the stipulation that the detachment contain only units with the Inquisition faction), and as per the latest FAQ there is a strong argument to be made that a Henchmen Warband formation isn't actually allowed to embark on its own Dedicated Transport unless it's a Chimera and the unit doesn't include any optional additions other than Daemonhosts and Joakero.

This has been solved, go to page 120 of your BRB, go to the Dedicated Transports section, it will say this:

Big Rule Book, pg 120 wrote: Sometimes a units Army List Entry will include a Transport option, allowing a vehicle to be selected together with the unit. These Dedicated Transports do not use up a slot on the Force Orginization Chart (pg 120), but for all other rules purposes count as having the same Battlefield Role and Faction (if any) as the unit the were bought for

Emphasis mine. As i said earlier, the reason people dont know this already is because it has literally never come up before, but there it is. Any Dedicated Transport that the Inquisition Warband takes, gains their Faction.

The Inquisition faction.

DCA, Priests, Techpriests, Crusaders, Astropaths, Sisters, GK, and Deathwatch have their own Factions. You can put a Henchmen Warband and an Inquisitor in a Valkyrie, but if the unit contains anything other than Acolytes, Inquisitors, Joakero, and Daemonhosts it can't start in its own transport.

(Unless the rule is 'must have faction X to deploy in transport of faction X' instead of 'may not deploy in transport of faction X if you are faction Y, regardless of other factions you may have', at which point you can deploy anything you want in any transport as long as you have an IC with the right faction to deploy with them. This is the issue with trying to implement a typeline in a backwards-compatible way, you end up screwing up some of the fundamental logic.)

Well, the Warband is a single unit correct? And the Warband bought the Valkyrie, right? So, by the rules, it has every model's Faction, as idiotic as that is.

Nope. The warband is a formation. The Acolyte unit within the formation bought the Valkyrie.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:
Are Seraphim the kind of unit you actually want to be in melee?

Depends a LOT on the target. Sometimes, yes. Anything that can't do you much harm in melee you want to charge. Because then the enemy cannot shoot you, and then you Hit and Run during their turn so that you can shoot again (and charge again). However being TOO good in melee can potentially be harmful because then you kill all your opponents and the rest of the enemies can shoot you, but S3 AP- means that basically never happen…

I agree here. Also, you might kill almost an entire squad in shooting but have a few models left behind, and you want to charge them to finish them off or at least tie them up in combat. Thanks to WS4 and having 2ccws, Seraphim are at least marginally better in melee than regular SoBs, and adding shred makes them about as potent as Assault Marines for a single charge.

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 Grimmor wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 Grimmor wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:


As a secondary problem to the factions/Henchmen warbands consider, if you will, that Acolyte squads may not take any of their Dedicated Transports other than the Chimera in the Inquisitorial Representative detachment (as per the stipulation that the detachment contain only units with the Inquisition faction), and as per the latest FAQ there is a strong argument to be made that a Henchmen Warband formation isn't actually allowed to embark on its own Dedicated Transport unless it's a Chimera and the unit doesn't include any optional additions other than Daemonhosts and Joakero.

This has been solved, go to page 120 of your BRB, go to the Dedicated Transports section, it will say this:

Big Rule Book, pg 120 wrote: Sometimes a units Army List Entry will include a Transport option, allowing a vehicle to be selected together with the unit. These Dedicated Transports do not use up a slot on the Force Orginization Chart (pg 120), but for all other rules purposes count as having the same Battlefield Role and Faction (if any) as the unit the were bought for

Emphasis mine. As i said earlier, the reason people dont know this already is because it has literally never come up before, but there it is. Any Dedicated Transport that the Inquisition Warband takes, gains their Faction.

The Inquisition faction.

DCA, Priests, Techpriests, Crusaders, Astropaths, Sisters, GK, and Deathwatch have their own Factions. You can put a Henchmen Warband and an Inquisitor in a Valkyrie, but if the unit contains anything other than Acolytes, Inquisitors, Joakero, and Daemonhosts it can't start in its own transport.

(Unless the rule is 'must have faction X to deploy in transport of faction X' instead of 'may not deploy in transport of faction X if you are faction Y, regardless of other factions you may have', at which point you can deploy anything you want in any transport as long as you have an IC with the right faction to deploy with them. This is the issue with trying to implement a typeline in a backwards-compatible way, you end up screwing up some of the fundamental logic.)

Well, the Warband is a single unit correct? And the Warband bought the Valkyrie, right? So, by the rules, it has every model's Faction, as idiotic as that is.

Nope. The warband is a formation. The Acolyte unit within the formation bought the Valkyrie.

"these units form a single unit with this formation's unit of acolytes"

Hey, GW, what happens if a unit is formed out of models with different factions?

oh right, they count as having all the factions of the composite units.

the_scotsman wrote:
(Truncated for brevity)

"these units form a single unit with this formation's unit of acolytes"

Hey, GW, what happens if a unit is formed out of models with different factions?

oh right, they count as having all the factions of the composite units.

So now you're telling me that Independent Characters attached to allied squads during deployment let you use their faction's transports?

Forget this s***, bring on the Combat Drop-capable Elysian Valkyries loaded with Skitarii.

the_scotsman wrote:

"these units form a single unit with this formation's unit of acolytes"

Hey, GW, what happens if a unit is formed out of models with different factions?

oh right, they count as having all the factions of the composite units.

Hatred & Preferred Enemy only according to Nu FAQ pg 11 - is it contradicted again somewhere else? :|

 malamis wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:

"these units form a single unit with this formation's unit of acolytes"

Hey, GW, what happens if a unit is formed out of models with different factions?

oh right, they count as having all the factions of the composite units.

Hatred & Preferred Enemy only according to Nu FAQ pg 11 - is it contradicted again somewhere else? :|

I know a unit with an IC attached counts as having its own FOC type and the ICs for purposes of Mission Tactics and the Deathwatch KT rules, but GW's rulings are rarely so consistent as to allow us to casually apply the transitive property to them.

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 malamis wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:

"these units form a single unit with this formation's unit of acolytes"

Hey, GW, what happens if a unit is formed out of models with different factions?

oh right, they count as having all the factions of the composite units.

Hatred & Preferred Enemy only according to Nu FAQ pg 11 - is it contradicted again somewhere else? :|

I know a unit with an IC attached counts as having its own FOC type and the ICs for purposes of Mission Tactics and the Deathwatch KT rules, but GW's rulings are rarely so consistent as to allow us to casually apply the transitive property to them.

How did it work with Allies previously?

And why wouldn't the same reasoning prevail here?

 Pouncey wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 malamis wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:

"these units form a single unit with this formation's unit of acolytes"

Hey, GW, what happens if a unit is formed out of models with different factions?

oh right, they count as having all the factions of the composite units.

Hatred & Preferred Enemy only according to Nu FAQ pg 11 - is it contradicted again somewhere else? :|

I know a unit with an IC attached counts as having its own FOC type and the ICs for purposes of Mission Tactics and the Deathwatch KT rules, but GW's rulings are rarely so consistent as to allow us to casually apply the transitive property to them.

How did it work with Allies previously?

And why wouldn't the same reasoning prevail here?

Previously 'Factions' didn't exist. GW pulled them out of their behind with no preparation or backwards-compatibility fitting of any kind, and this is the first time they've tried to make a multi-faction book this way, so it's all been utterly untested, unedited, and doesn't actually work.

 AnomanderRake wrote:
Previously 'Factions' didn't exist. GW pulled them out of their behind with no preparation or backwards-compatibility fitting of any kind, and this is the first time they've tried to make a multi-faction book this way, so it's all been utterly untested, unedited, and doesn't actually work.

Okay, but, I mean, if you were doing this before the C:IA codex with an unbound army drawn from multiple Codices, how would it work?

 AnomanderRake wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
(Truncated for brevity)

"these units form a single unit with this formation's unit of acolytes"

Hey, GW, what happens if a unit is formed out of models with different factions?

oh right, they count as having all the factions of the composite units.

So now you're telling me that Independent Characters attached to allied squads during deployment let you use their faction's transports?

Forget this s***, bring on the Combat Drop-capable Elysian Valkyries loaded with Skitarii.

Its weird with ICs, they count as being both Factions and no one is particularly sure if that means they can be in the Transport at game start

 Pouncey wrote:


Okay, but, I mean, if you were doing this before the C:IA codex with an unbound army drawn from multiple Codices, how would it work?

As i said above, a squad with an IC from a different Faction has both Factions, and this can create some serious weirdness.

 Pouncey wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:
Previously 'Factions' didn't exist. GW pulled them out of their behind with no preparation or backwards-compatibility fitting of any kind, and this is the first time they've tried to make a multi-faction book this way, so it's all been utterly untested, unedited, and doesn't actually work.

Okay, but, I mean, if you were doing this before the C:IA codex with an unbound army drawn from multiple Codices, how would it work?

"Work"? You're looking at the game where nothing works.

You'd ask your TO.

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:
Previously 'Factions' didn't exist. GW pulled them out of their behind with no preparation or backwards-compatibility fitting of any kind, and this is the first time they've tried to make a multi-faction book this way, so it's all been utterly untested, unedited, and doesn't actually work.

Okay, but, I mean, if you were doing this before the C:IA codex with an unbound army drawn from multiple Codices, how would it work?

"Work"? You're looking at the game where nothing works.

You'd ask your TO.

Not everyone plays at Tournaments, you know.

 Mr Morden wrote:
I have a number of issues with the new CIA Codex so am going to send GW a polite email expressing my concerns, querries etc.

It may not achieve anything but it can't hurt.

These include rules and general queries like:

why The Tech Priest's "Awaken the machine" only effects Astra Militarium vehicles not say its own Factions! Should be any friendly vehicles same as Blessings of the Omnissiah
If everything is it own faction how does this work with transports that are of different Factions - especially in relation to Acolytes and the Imperial Navy section and the Henchman warband
Why no Vendetta's in the IN Section (referenced in the specifc fluff for it)
Why is the Adepta Sororitas Detachment so dire in comparison to others granted to other units - even in the same codex. This and the next few notes is very disapointing given the boosts other forces receive.
removal of the Signature Sisters character (also a massive blow to the Serpahim Squad)
Moving the Sororitas Command Squad to Elite means that the already poor Celestian squad even worse
Why no special formation for the actual Sisters!
Still no invuln save for Inquisitors!!
Still no unique Ordo Xenos character since Valeria was erased - there are various Inquistor models and fluff chacracters - combine one!
Can an Acolyte unit start inside a different factions transport if its chooses it as a Dedicated Transport.
Chambers Militant - are they part of the warband or something else

anything else I have missed?

thanks

Me too, been emailing the CIA all week to ask for all my communist propaganda back with no response. As for actually mending the issue, I have nothing helpful to add.