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.

tneva82 wrote:
Yeah. Do you want to quickly measure or slowly "guess"(read calculate) it. Either way end result is same. Just more time wasted and more cheating and arquments added.

Before premeasuring was allowed nobody guessed anyway. Nothing changed except it got faster and less source of arguments.

Running 3 Whirlwinds in 3rd edition 40K made me really good at the practical applications of the Pythagorean Theorem.

 Mr Morden wrote:

 Jancoran wrote:
We practiced eliminating premeasuring today. It was...GREAT. So much less wasted time. Also we used the old Deep Striking rules. Also: great. So much faster.

In various games, in various systems, across the decades Pre-measuring was the thing that has saved the most time and stopped frustartion, cheating and arguments.

Arguments? Perhaps a FEW but none of the other things you mentioned. Lol. Clearly.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

tneva82 wrote:
Yeah. Do you want to quickly measure or slowly "guess"(read calculate) it. Either way end result is same. Just more time wasted and more cheating and arquments added.

Before premeasuring was allowed nobody guessed anyway. Nothing changed except it got faster and less source of arguments.

It isnt faster. Just one Deep Strike can be a major decision point. Honestly it was so liberating to test it. Feel free to scope out the battle report but we were placing models without getting to make a single measurement. Liberating. It isnt as if the measurements are difficult to guess most of the time.

Premeasuring is just about peoples usual wish to mitigate risk to themselves. No one finds it better or faster. The second I know you're deep striking i have to measure and cajole my models into position EXACTLY and as WELL AS POSSIBLE to cut off the deep strike. Takes way too long. Most measurements are from the enemy to assure they cant move and still hit X at deployment which takes a while to do if you have 19 units. That cannot POSSIBLY be faster. And so on.

It would be absurd to claim that premeasuring the game sped anything up. Literally doing things that you never had to do before is literally never going to take LESS time. That's just not how the physics of the universe works. Lol.

 Asmodai wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
Yeah. Do you want to quickly measure or slowly "guess"(read calculate) it. Either way end result is same. Just more time wasted and more cheating and arquments added.

Before premeasuring was allowed nobody guessed anyway. Nothing changed except it got faster and less source of arguments.

Running 3 Whirlwinds in 3rd edition 40K made me really good at the practical applications of the Pythagorean Theorem.

With pre known model sizes terrain sizes, your own hand that passes around, basic trigonomy etc etc etc etc there was so many ways to figure numbers out that term "guess range" weapon was rather joke.It was basically noob smashin tool. Only reason to want is to get advantage over noob and not advantage by having better tactics or strategy but by cheap tricks.

 Jancoran wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:

 Jancoran wrote:
We practiced eliminating premeasuring today. It was...GREAT. So much less wasted time. Also we used the old Deep Striking rules. Also: great. So much faster.

In various games, in various systems, across the decades Pre-measuring was the thing that has saved the most time and stopped frustartion, cheating and arguments.

Arguments? Perhaps a FEW but none of the other things you mentioned. Lol. Clearly.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

tneva82 wrote:
Yeah. Do you want to quickly measure or slowly "guess"(read calculate) it. Either way end result is same. Just more time wasted and more cheating and arquments added.

Before premeasuring was allowed nobody guessed anyway. Nothing changed except it got faster and less source of arguments.

It isnt faster. Just one Deep Strike can be a major decision point. Honestly it was so liberating to test it. Feel free to scope out the battle report but we were placing models without getting to make a single measurement. Liberating. It isnt as if the measurements are difficult to guess most of the time.

Premeasuring is just about peoples usual wish to mitigate risk to themselves. No one finds it better or faster. The second I know you're deep striking i have to measure and cajole my models into position EXACTLY and as WELL AS POSSIBLE to cut off the deep strike. Takes way too long. Most measurements are from the enemy to assure they cant move and still hit X at deployment which takes a while to do if you have 19 units. That cannot POSSIBLY be faster. And so on.

It would be absurd to claim that premeasuring the game sped anything up. Literally doing things that you never had to do before is literally never going to take LESS time. That's just not how the physics of the universe works. Lol.

No its absurd that you are claiming that NO-One finds it better or faster. Cearly I DO, my friends do, other poster does so no you totally wrong on that specifc point.

How it speeds it up for me and dozens of others have played games with:

Player a measures a point, says to other that is X distance, both agre. NOW no matter what happens, if models are knocked, accidently or otherwise, we KNOW the distance.

On your Deep Strike - you state how far they are, no one needs to measure it again until they move. Its agreed and Done.

I am astounded you think not pre-mesuring can take longer but hey your games are obviously really different to every game I have played in dozens of different systems in the decades of gamers.

There used to be this same crap by Warmachine players who claimed to have this awesome "skill" of being able to guess ranges - never mind that as tneva82 states people cheated or just looked at the board sizes.

 Jancoran wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:

 Jancoran wrote:
We practiced eliminating premeasuring today. It was...GREAT. So much less wasted time. Also we used the old Deep Striking rules. Also: great. So much faster.

In various games, in various systems, across the decades Pre-measuring was the thing that has saved the most time and stopped frustartion, cheating and arguments.

Arguments? Perhaps a FEW but none of the other things you mentioned. Lol. Clearly.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

tneva82 wrote:
Yeah. Do you want to quickly measure or slowly "guess"(read calculate) it. Either way end result is same. Just more time wasted and more cheating and arquments added.

Before premeasuring was allowed nobody guessed anyway. Nothing changed except it got faster and less source of arguments.

It isnt faster. Just one Deep Strike can be a major decision point. Honestly it was so liberating to test it. Feel free to scope out the battle report but we were placing models without getting to make a single measurement. Liberating. It isnt as if the measurements are difficult to guess most of the time.

Premeasuring is just about peoples usual wish to mitigate risk to themselves. No one finds it better or faster. The second I know you're deep striking i have to measure and cajole my models into position EXACTLY and as WELL AS POSSIBLE to cut off the deep strike. Takes way too long. Most measurements are from the enemy to assure they cant move and still hit X at deployment which takes a while to do if you have 19 units. That cannot POSSIBLY be faster. And so on.

It would be absurd to claim that premeasuring the game sped anything up. Literally doing things that you never had to do before is literally never going to take LESS time. That's just not how the physics of the universe works. Lol.

This is a massive waste of thread space that has nothing to do with SIsters of Battle, why the feth is it here? We're at the start of a new edition, can we please not totally derail the thread at a juncture when we should be starting to get out respective ducks in a row?

CAN WE GET BACK ON TOPIC PLEASE.

Sooo All vehicles ignore -1 to hit now with Heavy Weapons and can shoot non blast weapons into units in base contact They can even fire out of melee if you can shoot or burn away the attackers.

Looks good for Immolator, and at least the Hv Bolters on that and the Exorcist can be useful here

Now Hv weapons get -1 if anyone in your unit moves - good job Retributors don't care

Wonder what if anything mortifiers gets seeing their heavy flamer special rule just became neutered. You shoot into melee anyway...And with not many if any vehicles generally having pistols doubtful pistol rule changes so that it would matter. Day 1 errata. Or slight nerf to heavy flamer mortifiers.

In other news got to try out triumph vs tau. Bit blessed he didn't try to take her out(burst cannon riptide would have been fairly nasty at averaging about 8 damage and the 5 crisis suits with 3 cyclic ion blasters certainly could have caused some damage though risky to overcharge grilling probably 2 suits or so with MW's....) though had opponents done that it would have soaked about 640 pts of shooting...). Triumph herself did not much damage. 1 from the MW generating and we called game just as triumph was about to charge against the 2 last character he had left of his army that were in combat with celestine. They would have met messy end obviously.

However apart from benefit of having tons of MD(I had in the end 14 dice left, 4 of them 6's...and this with lots of 5's and 6's being used for inv saves and exorcist damage rolls) the extra act of faith(even for vehicles) and dialogus bonus were the stars.

Gave fresh respect for the dialogus model. Maybe not as useful if your AT is just exorcists but melta weapon based infantry army with simulcranums could be pretty sweet. Went to shopping list certainly.

tneva82 wrote:
Wonder what if anything mortifiers gets seeing their heavy flamer special rule just became neutered. You shoot into melee anyway...And with not many if any vehicles generally having pistols doubtful pistol rule changes so that it would matter. Day 1 errata. Or slight nerf to heavy flamer mortifiers..

on the other hand heavy bolter moritfiers will be able to shoot into melee with 0 penalty to hit since they can turn it into an assault weapon at least.

buff to penitent engines. might have to think about if its worth paying the extra points for the heavy flamer mortifier over the slower pen engine

Haha after 2 months since bought triumph is getting ready and...9th ed hits it with huge nerfbat. Any obscured trait terrain(like ruins) don'' block los to 18w model like triumph period. Forget hiding out of los t1 if opponent goes first

tneva82 wrote:
Haha after 2 months since bought triumph is getting ready and...9th ed hits it with huge nerfbat. Any obscured trait terrain(like ruins) don'' block los to 18w model like triumph period. Forget hiding out of los t1 if opponent goes first

Seems that way UNLESS the rules for LOS require you to see your target to shoot at it directly. The obscuring trait applies to terrain over 5" tall that may have gaps in the plastic if you know what I mean. Nothing in what we have seen says you can now shoot through solid LOS blocking walls and hills.

They say "shoot freely". Obscured terrain works in non tlos way. Players went 1st floor blocks los period, gw went whole piece blocks unless you are in it, 18w model or flyer(role, not keyword).

I-f gw had size stat on datasheets this could be avoided. They instead used wounds which works often but some models like triumph gets odd result.

Well 1 hope is day 1 errata adding exceptlon to trlumph and other similar models

ERJAK wrote:

 Jancoran wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:

 Jancoran wrote:
We practiced eliminating premeasuring today. It was...GREAT. So much less wasted time. Also we used the old Deep Striking rules. Also: great. So much faster.

In various games, in various systems, across the decades Pre-measuring was the thing that has saved the most time and stopped frustartion, cheating and arguments.

Arguments? Perhaps a FEW but none of the other things you mentioned. Lol. Clearly.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

tneva82 wrote:
Yeah. Do you want to quickly measure or slowly "guess"(read calculate) it. Either way end result is same. Just more time wasted and more cheating and arquments added.

Before premeasuring was allowed nobody guessed anyway. Nothing changed except it got faster and less source of arguments.

It isnt faster. Just one Deep Strike can be a major decision point. Honestly it was so liberating to test it. Feel free to scope out the battle report but we were placing models without getting to make a single measurement. Liberating. It isnt as if the measurements are difficult to guess most of the time.

Premeasuring is just about peoples usual wish to mitigate risk to themselves. No one finds it better or faster. The second I know you're deep striking i have to measure and cajole my models into position EXACTLY and as WELL AS POSSIBLE to cut off the deep strike. Takes way too long. Most measurements are from the enemy to assure they cant move and still hit X at deployment which takes a while to do if you have 19 units. That cannot POSSIBLY be faster. And so on.

It would be absurd to claim that premeasuring the game sped anything up. Literally doing things that you never had to do before is literally never going to take LESS time. That's just not how the physics of the universe works. Lol.

This is a massive waste of thread space that has nothing to do with SIsters of Battle, why the feth is it here? We're at the start of a new edition, can we please not totally derail the thread at a juncture when we should be starting to get out respective ducks in a row?

Its a forum. So.

Hello,

The datasheets of Battle Sisters Squad states that :

Every model is equipped with: bolt pistol; boltgun

The box actually contains 9 boltguns, and 2 bolt pistols.

Should the actualt boltgun model be considered both a boltgun AND a bolt pistol at the same time ?

Thanks.

Siegfriedfr wrote:
Hello,

The datasheets of Battle Sisters Squad states that :

Every model is equipped with: bolt pistol; boltgun

The box actually contains 9 boltguns, and 2 bolt pistols.

Should the actualt boltgun model be considered both a boltgun AND a bolt pistol at the same time ?

Thanks.

Well I think they are all modeled with a pistol holder somewhere? but yes every sister has the bolter and pistol...not that it matters since you can only use a pistol, OR a grenade OR everything else.

I seem to remember that there was a rule somewhere that states that grenades and pistols don't have to be modeled on every miniature in the unit if the whole unit is presumed to have them. For the life of me I can't find that rule right now, however.

the kit comes with pistol holders but convention is that we know they have pistols it only matters on the sgt who may have other options

Only TFG will get a bee in his bonnet if you don't have every pistol modeled but as has been said it's accepted convention that models standard issue wargear doesn't have to be WYSIWYG but all upgrades have to be.

Siegfriedfr wrote:
Hello,

The datasheets of Battle Sisters Squad states that :

Every model is equipped with: bolt pistol; boltgun

The box actually contains 9 boltguns, and 2 bolt pistols.

Should the actualt boltgun model be considered both a boltgun AND a bolt pistol at the same time ?

Thanks.

The Battle Sister box comes with 5 holstered Bolt Pistols along with a few options for having them in hand. It is generally considered to be not necessary to place non-optional wargear on a model, since there is no option to not have it. The one thing you need to be careful with is the Boltgun on the Sister Superior. She is allowed to swap out her Blotgun for Melee Weapon, so always be sure you have one on the model if you didn't swap it for a Combi-weapon from the Ranged Weapon list.

Hopefully Order of the sacred rose sees some compensation buffs for being only able to overwatch with 1 unit (for 1cp) with the overwatch changes coming in 9th...

DAy1 errata is quarnteed so likely something done there yes.

And another case of "sister codex was written with 9th in mind" claim is just baseless marketing hype. Or GW has lost last shred of sense as that ability makes zero sense balance wise in 9th. Weak order already in 8th so unless you errata it(proving it was not 9th ed in mind) or order goes from bad to junk.

Mortifiers with heavy flamers are implied to still have the same silly turn the flamer into a pistol rule in the newest faction focus, which is a bummer when they can already shoot. Also the new character rules make repentia and arcoflaggs MUCH more difficult to use.

The new “look out sir” character targeting rule is just another reason to not take Celestians - and yet most likely Celestians will go up from 10pts per model to 12 or even 13 SMH

 davidgr33n wrote:
The new “look out sir” character targeting rule is just another reason to not take Celestians - and yet most likely Celestians will go up from 10pts per model to 12 or even 13 SMH

Funny, I was thinking the opposite. I will be taking more, possibly two squads.

What does it even mean? I'm not sure I understand the rule in it's entirety. What even changed?

ERJAK wrote:
Mortifiers with heavy flamers are implied to still have the same silly turn the flamer into a pistol rule in the newest faction focus, which is a bummer when they can already shoot. Also the new character rules make repentia and arcoflaggs MUCH more difficult to use.

I actually think Arcos become more free roaming agents.Imagifiers will have to become a bit more aggressive too but idk how much else will really change for me...

Kinnay wrote:
What does it even mean? I'm not sure I understand the rule in it's entirety. What even changed?

What changed:

1. Characters must be within 3" of a qualifying unit, vehicle, or monster to be protected.

2. A unit can only protect characters if the unit has at least 3 models OR is a monster or vehicle.

3. Characters who are monsters or vehicle and have at least 10 wounds in their profile can screen for characters with 9 or less wounds in their profile. Magnus can screen a Chaos Lord, but Guilliman can't screen for Calgar because Guilliman only has 9W max.

4. Characters with 10+ wounds in their profile can't be screened at all (no change from current ).

5. If a character is the closest visible model, it can be shot even if it's within 3" of a monster, vehicle, or unit of 3+ models.

Thanks for the clarification, Taikishi.

So, only points 1 and 2 are important, right? Whereas you currently could have a character model run around on its own and still protected if there's another model between them and the firing enemy, now you have to have a qualifying unit within 3". Also, understrength units of 1 or two models cannot protect characters anymore. Correct?

So basically we're halfway back to the old times, where you had characters actually joining squads?

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2020/06/18/faction-focus-adepta-sororitasgw-homepage-post-4fw-homepage-post-4/

hum Sisters of battle are growing beards for the 9th edition

I am just so excited that the Sisters of Battle are going to transition so well into this new age. It is as if the IMperial Truth and the IMperial Creed are set to be resplendent in this new and exciting version of the universe.

Light will shine. Justice will be done and Heresy will be undone.

Thank you for listening.