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.

 alextroy wrote:
Call me optimistic, but I think "fully fledged" means it will be a full codex, not a cut rate one missing tons of units with no inkling of any new units that will be released with the full codex. Can't very well Beta test things we don't know about.

I'd rather it not have new units/options in it just because I know I'd want to use them in tournaments but without an official model there'd be pushback from people calling them open play only.

 alextroy wrote:
Call me optimistic, but I think "fully fledged" means it will be a full codex, not a cut rate one missing tons of units with no inkling of any new units that will be released with the full codex. Can't very well Beta test things we don't know about.

The new units with new models won't be in Chapter Approved because they don't exist yet. I expect the CA book will have rules for all of the existing models (possibly only the ones that will eventually be made plastic but I can't say that with confidence) as well as the standard codex stuff (convictions, stratagems, etc).

With the way that the Sisters model range basically needs rebuilding from scratch, I'm wondering if there's going to be too much for GW to release solely alongside the codex. I'm starting to think we'll see a DWOK / Tooth & Claw / Forgebane style boxed set to get some core SoB models from the beta codex out ahead of the main release.

What's more, yesterday's Vigilus preview includes a request for Imperial reinforcements and "it’s time for the Imperium to strike back". First Sisters models in early 2019, anyone?

The preview video voiceover also specifically referenced "Tribune", which is a Custodes rank.

 Arachnofiend wrote:
The new units with new models won't be in Chapter Approved because they don't exist yet. I expect the CA book will have rules for all of the existing models (possibly only the ones that will eventually be made plastic but I can't say that with confidence) as well as the standard codex stuff (convictions, stratagems, etc).

That's what I think will happen, which means it's an incomplete play-test.

When you're so afraid of showing off units that don't yet have miniatures that you won't even let the people clamouring for them test them, then really why bother?

Between the point increases to the cheap Ork HQs, 7ppm Boyz and now confirmed 5ppm traitor guardsmen from Black Fortress, this could indicate a plan for CA point changes.

I think GW will look to nerf the CP battery detachments that can pickup 5CP for detachments of 180 to 250pts. I'm expecting to see slight (mostly 1ppm) increases on units like:

Guardsmen
FW Renegade Militia
Kabalite Warriors
Fire Warriors
Guants / Rippers

Then 10-20% point hikes on the cheaper HQ units like Company Commanders or Neurothropes.

That reduces the gap against elite-only armies in terms of starting CP and helps to reduce the need for soup lists somewhat, both of which I think will be aims for GW.

I'm not sure if you're intentionally being misleading about that information or not.

All of those "points" include wargear, so things like the Flamers on at least one of the traitor Guardsmen, but you have no direct reason to assume they are accurate by CA standards when comparing them to normal Guardsmen.

Yeah one of the traitor guardsmen looks to have some kind of special weapon. A flamer it looks like.

 Galas wrote:
Yeah one of the traitor guardsmen looks to have some kind of special weapon. A flamer it looks like.

And IG flamers are 7 points. Which means the traitor guard are 4ppm just like loyalist guardsmen. (7 x 4) + 7 = 35

Golly would you like at that, it's almost like trying to misreprsent data can produce different results that suit a narrative.

 Cephalobeard wrote:
Golly would you like at that, it's almost like trying to misreprsent data can produce different results that suit a narrative.

I think people just overlooked the flamer, rather than anyone was deliberately misrepresenting anything.

 alextroy wrote:
Call me optimistic, but I think "fully fledged" means it will be a full codex, not a cut rate one missing tons of units with no inkling of any new units that will be released with the full codex. Can't very well Beta test things we don't know about.

You make assumption that there is even going to be new units. Orks got 6 kits and that was bloody big release. Count how many kits for existing kits. If not much under 6 don't count on completely new units

 Arachnofiend wrote:

ERJAK wrote:
Don't forget it's also +1 to wound against T8 AND +1 to wound against T4. The S3-S4 breakpoint on units that can take double strength equipment is BY FAR the most important one. The difference between an S6 repentia and an S8 repentia might be enough to have them actually see some legitimate play.

Derp, I'm an idiot. I was applying the conviction after the weapon modifier for a total of S7. Your interpretation is correct, which means that the ability is quite good assuming Sororitas assault is worth investing in at all.

Really? Historically in these cases I've seen people stand by BODMAS/PEMDAS if you're american, so S3 x2 +1 for a total of 7 rather than 8. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 ElvisJuice wrote:

 Arachnofiend wrote:

ERJAK wrote:
Don't forget it's also +1 to wound against T8 AND +1 to wound against T4. The S3-S4 breakpoint on units that can take double strength equipment is BY FAR the most important one. The difference between an S6 repentia and an S8 repentia might be enough to have them actually see some legitimate play.

Derp, I'm an idiot. I was applying the conviction after the weapon modifier for a total of S7. Your interpretation is correct, which means that the ability is quite good assuming Sororitas assault is worth investing in at all.

Really? Historically in these cases I've seen people stand by BODMAS/PEMDAS if you're american, so S3 x2 +1 for a total of 7 rather than 8. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Historically. 8th ed, like its authors, is different.

Mostly joking. Not actually trying to call anyone out.

 ElvisJuice wrote:
Really? Historically in these cases I've seen people stand by BODMAS/PEMDAS if you're american, so S3 x2 +1 for a total of 7 rather than 8. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

If it still works like that the trait will largely be ignored.

Repentia are the unit that really stands to gain and they need the full S8, though i'd prefer the viability of a whole unit not hinge so much on a trait. The other sisters units are just looking at a pair of S4 AP- attacks that miss half the time and turn into a single S3 attack in subsequent rounds - though it might entice a few seraphim-heavy players.

 ElvisJuice wrote:

 Arachnofiend wrote:

ERJAK wrote:
Don't forget it's also +1 to wound against T8 AND +1 to wound against T4. The S3-S4 breakpoint on units that can take double strength equipment is BY FAR the most important one. The difference between an S6 repentia and an S8 repentia might be enough to have them actually see some legitimate play.

Derp, I'm an idiot. I was applying the conviction after the weapon modifier for a total of S7. Your interpretation is correct, which means that the ability is quite good assuming Sororitas assault is worth investing in at all.

Really? Historically in these cases I've seen people stand by BODMAS/PEMDAS if you're american, so S3 x2 +1 for a total of 7 rather than 8. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

8th ed is a little different in that you apply modifiers to the base characteristics first, and then you apply weapon modifiers.

So its +1 to strength, and then you apply the x2 from the weapon.

To put it in mathematical terms,
2(S+1)
or
(characteristic modifiers) weapon modifiers

I don't like it, but that's how it is now.

I wonder if there will be a Conviction for general Church units...

 ElvisJuice wrote:
Really? Historically in these cases I've seen people stand by BODMAS/PEMDAS if you're american, so S3 x2 +1 for a total of 7 rather than 8. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

It's not really a normal order of operations thing, it's a definitions thing. It's not that the weapon is 2s+1 strength, it's that the weapon is 2s strength and we're adding one to s because of reasons. Unless it specifies the strength of the weapon like the salamanders flamer rules you're adding to the base statistic and then determining the weapon strength derived from that statistic.

ERJAK wrote:

 alextroy wrote:
Call me optimistic, but I think "fully fledged" means it will be a full codex, not a cut rate one missing tons of units with no inkling of any new units that will be released with the full codex. Can't very well Beta test things we don't know about.

I'd rather it not have new units/options in it just because I know I'd want to use them in tournaments but without an official model there'd be pushback from people calling them open play only.

Nothing says we won't get new units made up of the old models. Like the rest of our existing model line and units.

Oh look, another Imperium codex that will be incredibly strong, and be able to ally with everything.

Looks like they finally realized flamers were trash; shame, that it's after every other codex has released.

Why should only one army be good with flamers?

 dracpanzer wrote:
Nothing says we won't get new units made up of the old models. Like the rest of our existing model line and units.

Do you think anything of the current Sisters range is going to survive?

Nothing of what we've seen saves hand-flamers from the trash pile.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 ElvisJuice wrote:

 Arachnofiend wrote:

ERJAK wrote:
Don't forget it's also +1 to wound against T8 AND +1 to wound against T4. The S3-S4 breakpoint on units that can take double strength equipment is BY FAR the most important one. The difference between an S6 repentia and an S8 repentia might be enough to have them actually see some legitimate play.

Derp, I'm an idiot. I was applying the conviction after the weapon modifier for a total of S7. Your interpretation is correct, which means that the ability is quite good assuming Sororitas assault is worth investing in at all.

Really? Historically in these cases I've seen people stand by BODMAS/PEMDAS if you're american, so S3 x2 +1 for a total of 7 rather than 8. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

8th ed is a little different in that you apply modifiers to the base characteristics first, and then you apply weapon modifiers.

So its +1 to strength, and then you apply the x2 from the weapon.

To put it in mathematical terms,
2(S+1)
or
(characteristic modifiers) weapon modifiers

I don't like it, but that's how it is now.

It helps to think of it as two separate equations - you have to figure out what the strength of the model is before you can figure out what double the model's strength is, so a modifier to the base strength would always come first whether it was additive or multiplicative.

fe40k wrote:
Why should only one army be good with flamers?

Guard forgeworld hellhounds?

Or are you suggesting that the current hand flamers are in any way good?

 Arachnofiend wrote:

 alextroy wrote:
Call me optimistic, but I think "fully fledged" means it will be a full codex, not a cut rate one missing tons of units with no inkling of any new units that will be released with the full codex. Can't very well Beta test things we don't know about.

The new units with new models won't be in Chapter Approved because they don't exist yet. I expect the CA book will have rules for all of the existing models (possibly only the ones that will eventually be made plastic but I can't say that with confidence) as well as the standard codex stuff (convictions, stratagems, etc).

Nothing stops them from adding say Prioress as equivalent of lieutenant level HQ, or interpreting existing models in creative way. If CSM got one despite having no new minis, why not Sisters?

Also, unless AS release will be huge, the plastic kits will largely be similar to existing ones (troop, veteran, repentia, HQ) building multiple units so they might as well try to throw in a few new units if they can be built somehow from metal models, or give two plastic canonesses we have now rules of their own...

fe40k wrote:
Oh look, another Imperium codex that will be incredibly strong, and be able to ally with everything.

It will be incredibly strong? Nice! I'll be able to kick asses and take names with my army!

fe40k wrote:
Looks like they finally realized flamers were trash; shame, that it's after every other codex has released.

You mean "hand flamers" and "blood angels", right? Because the blood angels are the only one who also have access to hand flamers afaik. And, really, the stratagem doesn't make 1d3 s3 AP0 autohit at 12" range good.

fe40k wrote:
Why should only one army be good with flamers?

Hand flamers. Because they are (almost) the only one who can take them. But don't worry there are plenty of much more powerful flamers in other armies.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 dracpanzer wrote:
Nothing says we won't get new units made up of the old models. Like the rest of our existing model line and units.

Do you think anything of the current Sisters range is going to survive?

At least through to the CA Beta Dex. Almost all of our units are either the original 3 from the 2ed Codex or combinations of those models into different units (Dominions, Retributors, Celestians) it isn't impossible to find some new units made up from different combinations. I know I have a lot of Sister Superior models that never see a tabletop.