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.

 BlaxicanX wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
Looks like a really disappointing offering, given what I'm seeing thus far reading through this thread?

A pity. And I was a bit excited over it.

It's actually the best codex release we have ever seen.

Purely because it's the only codex, ever, that the players can actually get changed before its released.

I'm confident that 99% of the people complaining in this thread will never actually give GW the comprehensive feedback they are literally begging the playerbase for, though.

Would love to hear other people's experiences on this.

Mine is, the week it was released I scoured the web trying to find out how I am actually supposed to contact them with the feedback they apparently want. Eventually found an email address and wrote them letting them know that I'm keen to playtest the sisters beta codex and whether they had any advice on if there are any things in particular I should keep in mind for the playtesting/feedback. I got the auto-reply of "thanks so much for your feedback. We don't reply to all emails, but thanks for getting in touch" or something along those lines.

I found another email address a couple of weeks later and wrote again, this time to both addresses. Told them what I was thinking of doing - that I was planning to run a variety of units against various opponents in about 30 different games, make some general notes of my own and also try to gather data from around the internet on all the major forums of sisters players to get a pretty comprehensive amount of feedback reduced into a very brief and practical feedback document. I asked if this was the right sort of direction, and if this was something which would be helpful for them. Again, got the auto-reply and nothing else.

I mean, if GW are doing nothing to suggest that they're actually reading the emails they're receiving, how interested in feedback can they really be?

Right, can someone pm me the email I'm supposed to use for this feedback? Like superwill, it's not obvious to me.

Does it have to be a PM?

40kfaq@gwplc.com

 Mmmpi wrote:
Does it have to be a PM?

40kfaq@gwplc.com

Great. Now everyone knows.

Yep, that was one of the email addresses I wrote to and never heard back from, apart from the auto reply. Just makes me a little nervous that they’re not quite as sincere about being interested in feedback as they say they are. Really hoping to be proven wrong.

At the end of the day it was going to take me days of work to try and collate data and opinions and try and survey the fan base and then condense it all into small, tangible lists of sisters players voted top concerns and biggest hopes. Would’ve been willing to do it if I thought they’d be interested, but don’t want to waste my time and everyone else’s if it’s just going to sit in an email inbox somewhere, unread and unconsidered.

Not wanting to put anyone off delivering feedback, in fact, please do. Just wondered whether anyone had received anything more than the auto-reply of “thanks, we’ll totally take this on board...”

 superwill wrote:
Yep, that was one of the email addresses I wrote to and never heard back from, apart from the auto reply. Just makes me a little nervous that they’re not quite as sincere about being interested in feedback as they say they are. Really hoping to be proven wrong.
.”

They're not going to message everyone back.

 MacPhail wrote:


I feel like this has merit just on volume of dice. I've messed with Holy Trinity on a unit of melta Doms with a combi flamer and it never felt like enough dice were affected, although it does provide a nice boost against T8 targets.

Thats pretty much it, you're wounding anything t6+ 1/3rd-1/2 of the time, the more dice you are throwing the better. if the meltas you are giving up to trinity are most of your potential wounds, then it isn't worth it, which is what the naysayers earlier in the thread that weren't doing any math were saying.

if we had a dedicated flamer squad, I could totally see throwing a combi melta in there to trigger trinity could really add up the bodies.

 pretre wrote:

 superwill wrote:
Yep, that was one of the email addresses I wrote to and never heard back from, apart from the auto reply. Just makes me a little nervous that they’re not quite as sincere about being interested in feedback as they say they are. Really hoping to be proven wrong.
.”

They're not going to message everyone back.

I receive the same when I fed back on White Dwarf previosuly and some ideas - auto reply and then a month or so later a proper reply.

(hopefully) they are receving a large volume of emails about the beta playtest and their reply will be in the form of a update and revision.

 pretre wrote:

They're not going to message everyone back.

Obviously.

But if the only email anyone has ever received back is
“Hi!
Thanks for sending your feedback to us. While we can’t respond to everyone personally, rest assured that your message will be read and taken into consideration when we’re writing the next set of FAQs.”
That obviously instills less confidence than if someone has actually received a personal reply that shows someone actually read the email. Especially since the auto-reply says “we’ll consider this when writing our next FAQs” when we are sending in feedback on Sisters, not the next FAQ...

Ultimately, if I send them a question asking what kind of feedback they’re looking for and how I can help (twice) and both times only get the reply “thanks, we’ll consider that for our next FAQ” then that basically says they’re not really THAT keen on getting feedback, assuming someone did read the emails but didn’t think it worth responding. If someone else has received a personal reply, that would show they at least read some emails, which is why I was asking.

 superwill wrote:

 pretre wrote:

They're not going to message everyone back.

Obviously.

But if the only email anyone has ever received back is
“Hi!
Thanks for sending your feedback to us. While we can’t respond to everyone personally, rest assured that your message will be read and taken into consideration when we’re writing the next set of FAQs.”
That obviously instills less confidence than if someone has actually received a personal reply that shows someone actually read the email. Especially since the auto-reply says “we’ll consider this when writing our next FAQs” when we are sending in feedback on Sisters, not the next FAQ...

Ultimately, if I send them a question asking what kind of feedback they’re looking for and how I can help (twice) and both times only get the reply “thanks, we’ll consider that for our next FAQ” then that basically says they’re not really THAT keen on getting feedback, assuming someone did read the emails but didn’t think it worth responding. If someone else has received a personal reply, that would show they at least read some emails, which is why I was asking.

Fair enough - maybe try posting the same n the FB page and seeing what they say? They usually respond to such querries with something

 Grundz wrote:


Thats pretty much it, you're wounding anything t6+ 1/3rd-1/2 of the time, the more dice you are throwing the better. if the meltas you are giving up to trinity are most of your potential wounds, then it isn't worth it, which is what the naysayers earlier in the thread that weren't doing any math were saying.

if we had a dedicated flamer squad, I could totally see throwing a combi melta in there to trigger trinity could really add up the bodies.

How about HF rets or flamer doms (with an extra girl for the boltgun and a CM on the superior) ?

After playing around with it for a while, the Faithful 17 seems to be like our best build. It's a viable alternative to the Loyal 32, at least.
Benefits: Somewhat better durability against low-AP weapons, better firepower against T3, T4, T6, and T7, (Each squad has 8/16 3+ S4 shots, instead of 10/20 4+ S3 shots,) and a pretty good battery of psychic defense.
Drawbacks: Costs 57pts more (assuming you give the Canoness a Power Maul,) fewer bodies for screening, worse against T5 and T8+.

I took first a few days ago at a local tournament using two detachments of the Faithful 17 supporting a Patrol detachment of Custodes, which was mostly jetbikes. (I did supplement the Faithful 17 with two Repressors and some meltaguns, so it was really one detachment of the Faithful 17 and one detachment of more standard sisters.) I had enough Command Points to go around, and the battle sisters proved to be an excellent source of counter fire.

Waaaghpower wrote:
After playing around with it for a while, the Faithful 17 seems to be like our best build. It's a viable alternative to the Loyal 32, at least.
Benefits: Somewhat better durability against low-AP weapons, better firepower against T3, T4, T6, and T7, (Each squad has 8/16 3+ S4 shots, instead of 10/20 4+ S3 shots,) and a pretty good battery of psychic defense.
Drawbacks: Costs 57pts more (assuming you give the Canoness a Power Maul,) fewer bodies for screening, worse against T5 and T8+.

Okay, here's my problem with this... That's not our best build. That's maybe the best build for allying with another list.

I took first a few days ago at a local tournament using two detachments of the Faithful 17 supporting a Patrol detachment of Custodes, which was mostly jetbikes. (I did supplement the Faithful 17 with two Repressors and some meltaguns, so it was really one detachment of the Faithful 17 and one detachment of more standard sisters.) I had enough Command Points to go around, and the battle sisters proved to be an excellent source of counter fire.

Okay, so forgetting the custodes rq, since they are just a patrol, What was the other detachment?

 pretre wrote:

Waaaghpower wrote:
After playing around with it for a while, the Faithful 17 seems to be like our best build. It's a viable alternative to the Loyal 32, at least.
Benefits: Somewhat better durability against low-AP weapons, better firepower against T3, T4, T6, and T7, (Each squad has 8/16 3+ S4 shots, instead of 10/20 4+ S3 shots,) and a pretty good battery of psychic defense.
Drawbacks: Costs 57pts more (assuming you give the Canoness a Power Maul,) fewer bodies for screening, worse against T5 and T8+.

Okay, here's my problem with this... That's not our best build. That's maybe the best build for allying with another list.

I'd go so far as to say that it seems like an important part of our best build even when taking a pure Sisters of Battle list. If I've got a full normal detachment of units and 230pts to spend, and I'm running pure, you can bet I'm going to add in the Faithful 17 for the extra command points.

I took first a few days ago at a local tournament using two detachments of the Faithful 17 supporting a Patrol detachment of Custodes, which was mostly jetbikes. (I did supplement the Faithful 17 with two Repressors and some meltaguns, so it was really one detachment of the Faithful 17 and one detachment of more standard sisters.) I had enough Command Points to go around, and the battle sisters proved to be an excellent source of counter fire.

Okay, so forgetting the custodes rq, since they are just a patrol, What was the other detachment?

One detachment of the Faithful 17.
One detachment of the Faithful 17, but two of the BSS got meltaguns instead of Storm Bolters, and I took two Repressors.
One Patrol of Custodes.

Waaaghpower wrote:
I'd go so far as to say that it seems like an important part of our best build even when taking a pure Sisters of Battle list. If I've got a full normal detachment of units and 230pts to spend, and I'm running pure, you can bet I'm going to add in the Faithful 17 for the extra command points.

I guess if you're not going Bat, sure.

I took first a few days ago at a local tournament using two detachments of the Faithful 17 supporting a Patrol detachment of Custodes, which was mostly jetbikes. (I did supplement the Faithful 17 with two Repressors and some meltaguns, so it was really one detachment of the Faithful 17 and one detachment of more standard sisters.) I had enough Command Points to go around, and the battle sisters proved to be an excellent source of counter fire.

Okay, so forgetting the custodes rq, since they are just a patrol, What was the other detachment?

One detachment of the Faithful 17.
One detachment of the Faithful 17, but two of the BSS got meltaguns instead of Storm Bolters, and I took two Repressors.
One Patrol of Custodes.

I didn't end up facing any Knights, but here's (in short) how the three games went: (It was a 1750pt campaign, FWIW.)

Game 1 was against a pure Crimson Fists player, who was pretty much demolished by Turn 3. Even pumping most of his army into my jetbikes only killed three of them, and then I blew apart all of his anti tank/heavy firepower in one round. After that it was mopup, where my superior mobility made it impossible for him to get objectives or escape. (It was about even odds if I would actually get Slay the Warlord, since he deep struck late in the game far away from my footsloggers and hid him inside ruins where my bikes couldn't physically fit, but he decided to just resign at the end of turn 4.)

Game 2 was the Eternal War mission where you nominate certain characters as "having intel" and then get points for their survival, as well as points for using them to hold an objective in the center of the board. I went up against a tau gunline.
Between his really high firepower and a particularly bad set of rolls on my part (I failed 8 out of 10 4+ invulns,) my jetbikes all died on turn 2. However, I controlled the center of the board and was able to hide most of my units out of Line of Sight, so he couldn't use most of his weapons to get me off of the objective or kill my characters. Then, on Turn 3, I got my footslogging custodes unit into combat with his Stormsurge, and my luck completely flipped - He failed 6 out of 8 4+ invulns, and I got 4 3s and two 2s for damage. Since he also had to fall back, that meant he was hitting on 6s with his biggest unit and had only broadsides for damage.
In the end, it was close on model count, with both of us being shattered to pieces (he had three broadsides left, I had one wound on my Jetbike Captain and a bunch of scattered SoB units.) Point wise, though, I'd kept my important characters alive for longer and had been sitting on the center objective all game, so it wasn't a contest there. This was still my closest game - After losing all my jetbikes, if I hadn't gotten lucky against his stormsurge in turn he probably could have taken the center objective and won against me.

Third game was very much in my favor, not even a contest. He was running melee-heavy Tyranids, and had pulled out two wins so far with his swarms of genestealers rushing forward (He could get turn 1 assault thanks to the Swarmlord, with 20 Genestealers,) his heavy psychic onslaught (The Swarmlord and two Neurothropes,) and two Tervigons who sat back with powerful anti-tank.
This was not a good matchup for him. My six jetbikes overwatched on 5+ with rerolls, killing 5 of his genestealers before he hit, then popped Avenge the Fallen and chopped his squad down to just two genestealers. His other squad, the one he couldn't charge with, took the brunt of shooting from my sisters of battle (as well as a charge,) and got decimated as well. The psychic abilities in his army were shut down by my massive quantities of Deny the Witch - One from every squad, plus a 4+ "Ignore that power" strategem, which ensured he couldn't hit me with The Horror and made it difficult for everything else to go off.

The only scary thing was the Swarmlord himself, who I recklessly charged with my jetbike captain. I killed him, but he used the "swing when you die" ability and took six wounds of my captain, which meant I was limping along at one wound for the rest of the game. (If I didn't have Victor of the Blood Games, he would have died.)


I still want to see how this matchup performs against a Knight list, or other top-tier tournament fare, but I was overall very pleased with its performance.

 superwill wrote:


Would love to hear other people's experiences on this.

Mine is, the week it was released I scoured the web trying to find out how I am actually supposed to contact them with the feedback they apparently want. Eventually found an email address and wrote them letting them know that I'm keen to playtest the sisters beta codex and whether they had any advice on if there are any things in particular I should keep in mind for the playtesting/feedback. I got the auto-reply of "thanks so much for your feedback. We don't reply to all emails, but thanks for getting in touch" or something along those lines.

I found another email address a couple of weeks later and wrote again, this time to both addresses. Told them what I was thinking of doing - that I was planning to run a variety of units against various opponents in about 30 different games, make some general notes of my own and also try to gather data from around the internet on all the major forums of sisters players to get a pretty comprehensive amount of feedback reduced into a very brief and practical feedback document. I asked if this was the right sort of direction, and if this was something which would be helpful for them. Again, got the auto-reply and nothing else.

I mean, if GW are doing nothing to suggest that they're actually reading the emails they're receiving, how interested in feedback can they really be?

interesting, if you take the time in the SoB section of the book you would notice they provided the email to send all feedback so you wouldnt need to scour the web.

Also, not for nothing, anyone who did send in their feedback of the book I wouldnt be suprised if they discard. Im can only imagine they want actual "playtest results and problem/solution" feedback. Send in your suggestions first week of receiving the book, or at realese just shows there was little to no playtesting to back it up.


Overall, I have no complaints on the book. Im not thrilled with the AoF process now, but its okay, I can live with it. I just feel like its a weaker version of Command Point/Strategems or AM orders. It just makes some of the Faction Order Convictions much weaker then others.

Im sure they made tactful decision about it in regards to any new units that may come in the future... Or not. Lol

If anything I would request more AoF abilities to add, or at the least remove the one a turn per strategem limit.

One simple change they could make?

Each AoF can only be USED once per turn instead of ATTEMPTED once per turn.

At least you could be guaranteed to get an AoF every turn- maybe not the game changer, but if not, at least something.

Well, I faced my friend who used a sisters of battle battalion in his imperium soup army and they are great so far. Bear in mind, he didnt just bring a bare bones battalion for CP battery.

He had an immolater and 2 Rhinos. Had three sisters squads with some melta in them. Had a Dominion squad with storm bolters. Had a diagolos, cannoness and celestine. So, he had that 4++ invul bubble going on even the rhinos and it formed a really hard to kill centre bubble. Shooting at a 4++ Rhino is so inefficient I didn't even want to try.

He used act of faith mainly to let Celestine attack twice, and maybe heal up. So he didnt have many points for that but he didnt need any. A Celestine that attacks twice is really potent in combat. She doesn't need to attack turn 1. She can fly up the board and stay behind rhinos and stuff in the middle of the 4++ bubble. Turn 2 onwards she can then fly forward behind enemy lines and wreck absolute havoc because she is a wrecking ball in melee. And even if you kill her, that probably took far more shooting than you imagined, and then she comes back and does it all over again for at least another round. Points wise, she should always make back her cost and more.

Sisters look pretty powerful as part of Imperium soup. And its not as if they are powerful only due to 1 unit or 1 model. There are a variety of things that come together for them. They can easily shore up their weakness in say long range anti tank by using other Imperium armies for that part. Same goes for close combat melee too.

You may say its unfair to have to rely on other imperium armies to shore up weaknesses. But which imperium player these days play pure Astral milittarium anyway?

Eldenfirefly wrote:
Well, I faced my friend who used a sisters of battle battalion in his imperium soup army and they are great so far. Bear in mind, he didnt just bring a bare bones battalion for CP battery.

He had an immolater and 2 Rhinos. Had three sisters squads with some melta in them. Had a Dominion squad with storm bolters. Had a diagolos, cannoness and celestine. So, he had that 4++ invul bubble going on even the rhinos and it formed a really hard to kill centre bubble. Shooting at a 4++ Rhino is so inefficient I didn't even want to try.

If you struggle with T7 4++ that requires it to stay within a 6" moving, 5-wound character's warlord aura, your list must have a hell of a time with Knights at T8 3++, Mortarion at T8 4++, Magnus at T7 3++ rerolling 1s, Ravagers/Talos at 5++ 6+++ -1 to be hit, etc. which are all strictly better save profiles, significantly more point-efficient offensively, and can each operate independently.

Eldenfirefly wrote:

He used act of faith mainly to let Celestine attack twice, and maybe heal up. So he didnt have many points for that but he didnt need any. A Celestine that attacks twice is really potent in combat. She doesn't need to attack turn 1. She can fly up the board and stay behind rhinos and stuff in the middle of the 4++ bubble. Turn 2 onwards she can then fly forward behind enemy lines and wreck absolute havoc because she is a wrecking ball in melee. And even if you kill her, that probably took far more shooting than you imagined, and then she comes back and does it all over again for at least another round. Points wise, she should always make back her cost and more.

Sisters look pretty powerful as part of Imperium soup. And its not as if they are powerful only due to 1 unit or 1 model.

While I will admit that they look respectable for souping in a non-primary detachment, the problems are that they cannot operate as an independent faction because none of their weaknesses were addressed (melee options all suck; inconsistent anti-tank; struggle against invuln saves), while new weaknesses were added (hyper-dependent on footslogging support characters; movement/deployment limitations due to mandatory deathstar; The Passion can be interrupted), and the individual units got significantly worse due to the Acts of Faith nerfs (I don't understand why the new AoFs require a roll other than to try and add "wow factor" to succeeding).

Eldenfirefly wrote:

There are a variety of things that come together for them.

The irony being that those things "coming together" is the problem: it forces you to play Order of The Pink Tide, because you're stuck with a mandatory deathstar build which needs a footslogging Warlord and Celestine, and if you go any further into Sisters than that, a Dialogus and Priest become autoincludes, so you end up better off fielding the entire army on foot for cost-efficiency, spamming additional 3+/4++ bodies rather than trying to protect them.

To put it plain: I had a conversation with another competitive Sisters player recently, where he said with a straight face that he was considering dropping his Exorcists and running three sets of Retributors with boltguns instead to fill out his Brigade, so that he could fit more bodies.

Eldenfirefly wrote:

They can easily shore up their weakness in say long range anti tank by using other Imperium armies for that part. Same goes for close combat melee too.

You may say its unfair to have to rely on other imperium armies to shore up weaknesses. But which imperium player these days play pure Astral milittarium anyway?

Beta Sisters are not particularly good at anything besides denying the psychic phase, which leaves them with a LOT of holes to fill. The problem with that though is that with the exception of giving the Canoness a jumppack, they already possess units which are supposed to fill those holes... and in the case of melee, they have a LOT of options for that slot... they just all fail at their intended roles pretty badly due to design flaws, and now with the beta codex, it feels like it comes from a place of malice rather than stupidity.

I think we made it a whole page or two before you flogged the pink tide again. It's a milestone!




Automatically Appended Next Post:

PenitentJake wrote:
One simple change they could make?

Each AoF can only be USED once per turn instead of ATTEMPTED once per turn.

At least you could be guaranteed to get an AoF every turn- maybe not the game changer, but if not, at least something.

I think opening up either One Successful or just let them burn multiples would be fine. Just don't let any one unit use the same one twice.

I mean, you have limited faith anyways.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Waaaghpower wrote:
I didn't end up facing any Knights, but here's (in short) how the three games went: (It was a 1750pt campaign, FWIW.)
Snip
I still want to see how this matchup performs against a Knight list, or other top-tier tournament fare, but I was overall very pleased with its performance.

Thanks for the update. It seems mostly to be a testament to your jetbikes. As it is, the SOB part of this report seems an after thought.

Didn't you just play a version of the Pink Tide in your last RTT?

Rynner wrote:
Didn't you just play a version of the Pink Tide in your last RTT?

I played mechanized Ebon Chalice SOB with 3 characters. 7 seraphim and two min BSS on foot.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Even if I was running all foot sisters with OotBR, I wouldn't call it Pink Tide though.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
The problem I have with the pink tide is that PS has determined that this is the one and true way to play SOB under the beta codex and every page or so goes off on how the beta is the worst thing ever and blah de blah pink tide. Plus it's a dumb nickname.

The idea behind this thread in the past has not been to find one build, everyone line up behind it and not question the dogma. It's to find ways to talk about tactics for Sisters. This can include a variety of tactics, lists, builds, etc.

 pretre wrote:
I think we made it a whole page or two before you flogged the pink tide again. It's a milestone!

>makes his own Best Sisters category
>still doesn't win it

pretre wrote:The problem I have with the pink tide is that PS has determined that this is the one and true way to play SOB under the beta codex

*looks at every GT/Major top10 list containing a SoB model post-CA18 thus far*

Well I don't know about you, but this completely unexpected development has left me flabbergasted.

pretre wrote:
The idea behind this thread in the past has not been to find one build, everyone line up behind it and not question the dogma.

TPT isn't a specific list, but the playstyle behind it: swarming "Shoota Girls" around Warbossestine and KFF Mekoness, and drowning everything in buckets of dice.

So... i've had some success with the following list... only really losing one weird dice spikey game so far


I'm going to try this one next

I think for me one major wishlist I'd have is just for more of the limited units to be "full sisters" so to speak. Penitent Engines come to mind in particular; I want them to have AoF, SoF, etc. Taking an already small group and further pushing out several things from benefiting from faction powers seems both needless and penalizing. Likewise, Celestine should follow the same pattern as Nid named characters: gain benefits from any subfaction she joins.

Also, if they're going to push suboptimal weapons so hard, as is appropriate for sisters, more support is needed. Blessed bolts is spiffy, but melta and flamer specific strategums would be good. I'd also rather there only be one sub-faction which focuses on faith point generation. I'd much rather see a specialization like "add 3 inches to flamer distances" to use an example.

 frgsinwntr wrote:
So... i've had some success with the following list... only really losing one weird dice spikey game so far

Spoiler:

Bloody rose brig
HQ celestine 160
HQ cannoness with evisorator/plasma pistol (WL/book) 62
HQ cannoness with evisorator/plasma pistol 62
Elite 8 repentia 120
Elite misstress of repentance 35
Elite preacher 25
Elite preacher 25
Elite 9 arco flagellents 135
troops 5 sisters, 3 storm bolters 51
troops 5 sisters, 3 storm bolters 51
troops 5 sisters, 3 storm bolters 51
troops 5 sisters, 3 storm bolters 51
troops 5 sisters, 3 storm bolters 51
troops 5 sisters, 3 storm bolters 51
Fast 10 seraphim with bolt pistols, 4 flamers/plasma P 127
Fast 5 dominions with 5 storm bolters 60
Fast 5 dominions with 5 storm bolters 60
heavy exorcist, hk 131
heavy exorcist, hk 131
heavy exorcist, hk 131
transport rhino, 2 storm bolters 77
transport rhino, 2 storm bolters 77

HQ BA smash bro, shield (DC/Angels wing) 126
troops 5 scouts, one missile launcher 80

Elite callidus assassin 70

I'm going to try this one next

Spoiler:

Bloody rose brig
HQ celestine 160
HQ cannoness with evisorator/plasma pistol (WL/book) 62
HQ cannoness with evisorator/plasma pistol 62
Elite 8 repentia 120
Elite misstress of repentance 35
Elite preacher 25
Elite preacher 25
Elite 8 arco flagellents 120
troops 5 sisters, 3 storm bolters 51
troops 5 sisters, 3 storm bolters 51
troops 5 sisters, 3 storm bolters 51
troops 5 sisters, 3 storm bolters 51
troops 5 sisters, 3 storm bolters 51
troops 5 sisters, 3 storm bolters 51
Fast 10 seraphim with bolt pistols, 4 flamers/plasma P 127
Fast 5 dominions with 5 storm bolters 60
Fast 5 dominions with 5 storm bolters 60
Fast 5 dominions with 5 storm bolters 60
heavy exorcist, hk 131
heavy exorcist, hk 131
heavy exorcist, hk 131
transport rhino, 2 storm bolters 77
transport rhino, 2 storm bolters 77

Elite vindicare 80
Elite vindicare 80
Elite callidus assassin 70

That's a lot of girls. No target for the Blade or Brazier? How'd the callidus work out for you and why'd you ditch the smash?

I'm really thinking of going for more seraphim and I had been thinking of going to all flamers and Plas, how'd it work for you?

Sent my feedback in anyway. Might send more later. Hopefully our feedback will be listened to...

What was in the feedback?

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
What was in the feedback?

My main complaint was about celestians still not really having an identity worth using. Had other stuff (like repentia and a few of the order bonuses and strategems), but I really need to playtest more to get more concrete things.