Author |
Message |
 |
|
 |
Advert
|
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. |
|
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2021/06/08 05:12:38
Subject: Sisters of Battle 2019 Codex Tactics
|
 |
Archmagos Veneratus Extremis
On the Internet
|
Lammia wrote:yukishiro1 wrote:It's a better balanced book, I'm really not sure it's a more interesting book. What made sisters interesting in the past was their rough edges and weird rules, and a lot of those got toned down.
And what got added is mostly pretty generic stuff - the new units are all pretty bland, prayers C&Ped from the standard formulas, upgrades that function exactly the same as the ad mech ones, etc etc. It doesn't really feel like a book written by someone who loved the faction, it feels like a book written by someone brought in to standardize things.
I'd agree but this book added some clear dud options to the book, like tanks. With that it's hard to say it's better balanced.
Saint C and the twins are also a design nightmare that they've brought back...
Tanks are a game wide issue, not just a Sisters one. They need to do something to fix the tanks themselves to make them worth taking.
As for Celestine I think they've done a lot to clean her up. In fact we now have 3 mixed units and they all have a "X must take wounds first" rule baked in.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2021/06/08 05:13:12
Subject: Sisters of Battle 2019 Codex Tactics
|
 |
Pious Palatine
|
ClockworkZion wrote:
I'd argue it's at least a more interesting codex. Each Order feels like it leans into a different kind of build and they addressed some of the more abusive elements of the book. I get that you think that if it can't beat pre-nerf Drukhari with it's eyes closed and both hands behind it's back it's bad, but as someone who doesn't play competitively I feel the book is more interesting and most of the nerfs were side grades instead of straight downgrades.
Repentia are still our best melee threat and Retributors went from statistically the best option to our only viable shooting threat.
I've been looking at this every which way since the review dropped and I just don't see how anything else ends up being better than maxed BR repentia with 3 squads of AS MM retributors and Vahl.
We're stuck with exactly the same two units except now they require even more resources to be slightly less reliable.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/06/08 05:19:15
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2021/06/08 05:23:33
Subject: Re:Sisters of Battle 2019 Codex Tactics
|
 |
Grim Dark Angels Interrogator-Chaplain
|
Personally I think Sacresants are better than Repentia, although both most likely have their uses. Repentia are an elimination threat; you throw them at something you want dead, and it dies, and then they die. Sacresants are more of a brawler type of unit; able to take hits and still dish out decent damage with their D2 maces.
And I still think putting MM in a bunch of MSU Argent Shroud squads is better than running Retributors because of the reroll ability. Plus you don't have all your eggs in one basket. Depending on what else is in the list, you could probably still take one or two Retributor units to bring in from reserves for spike damage. Hell, go MSU a bit with those also, taking only a couple of MM and a Cherub so you can get a little more concentrated firepower in a couple of places.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2021/06/08 05:25:18
Subject: Sisters of Battle 2019 Codex Tactics
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
Lammia wrote:I'd agree but this book added some clear dud options to the book, like tanks. With that it's hard to say it's better balanced.
Saint C and the twins are also a design nightmare that they've brought back...
Some would point out that making the tanks duds is indeed standardizing the book with the rest of 9th edition.
I actually agree re Saint C, she's the one place they've taken what was there and made it weirder and wackier. But my initial sense is that they did it in a way that is going to cause a lot of frustration for less tactically astute players running less competitive lists, without necessarily making her all that more compelling competitively.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2021/06/08 05:25:45
Subject: Sisters of Battle 2019 Codex Tactics
|
 |
Archmagos Veneratus Extremis
On the Internet
|
ERJAK wrote: ClockworkZion wrote:
I'd argue it's at least a more interesting codex. Each Order feels like it leans into a different kind of build and they addressed some of the more abusive elements of the book. I get that you think that if it can't beat pre-nerf Drukhari with it's eyes closed and both hands behind it's back it's bad, but as someone who doesn't play competitively I feel the book is more interesting and most of the nerfs were side grades instead of straight downgrades.
Repentia are still our best melee threat and Retributors went from statistically the best option to our only viable shooting threat.
I've been looking at this every which way since the review dropped and I just don't see how anything else ends up being better than maxed BR repentia with 3 squads of AS MM retributors and Vahl.
We're stuck with exactly the same two units except now they require even more resources to be slightly less reliable.
So you say, but between your track record of being proven wrong on other claims and Dominions being better I'm going to take anything you say with a lot of salt.
Honestly I feel there is more viability in the book than you're willing to see, that or your meta is so MEQ that you can only think of the book in that context. Either way I feel like this book will be interesting as things shake out over time. Automatically Appended Next Post: yukishiro1 wrote:Lammia wrote:I'd agree but this book added some clear dud options to the book, like tanks. With that it's hard to say it's better balanced.
Saint C and the twins are also a design nightmare that they've brought back...
Some would point out that making the tanks duds is indeed standardizing the book with the rest of 9th edition.
I actually agree re Saint C, she's the one place they've taken what was there and made it weirder and wackier. But my initial sense is that they did it in a way that is going to cause a lot of frustration for less tactically astute players running less competitive lists, without necessarily making her all that more compelling competitively.
Honestly I'm okay with less competetive stuff going into the books. I mean one of the characters comes with a rule for crusade right on her datasheet. If anything this shows that GW is starting to pay more attention to adding things to the game for stuff outside of matched play.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/06/08 05:27:05
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2021/06/08 05:30:49
Subject: Sisters of Battle 2019 Codex Tactics
|
 |
Calm Celestian
|
ClockworkZion wrote:Lammia wrote:yukishiro1 wrote:It's a better balanced book, I'm really not sure it's a more interesting book. What made sisters interesting in the past was their rough edges and weird rules, and a lot of those got toned down.
And what got added is mostly pretty generic stuff - the new units are all pretty bland, prayers C&Ped from the standard formulas, upgrades that function exactly the same as the ad mech ones, etc etc. It doesn't really feel like a book written by someone who loved the faction, it feels like a book written by someone brought in to standardize things.
I'd agree but this book added some clear dud options to the book, like tanks. With that it's hard to say it's better balanced.
Saint C and the twins are also a design nightmare that they've brought back...
Tanks are a game wide issue, not just a Sisters one. They need to do something to fix the tanks themselves to make them worth taking.
As for Celestine I think they've done a lot to clean her up. In fact we now have 3 mixed units and they all have a "X must take wounds first" rule baked in.
"Make the Exocist worse" was actively not the way to improve tanks though.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2021/06/08 05:37:11
Subject: Sisters of Battle 2019 Codex Tactics
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
What they did to the Exorcist is classic "hold my beer!" GW stuff. It's like they couldn't decide whether to make it be a battle tank or make it artillery that ignores LOS, so they compromised by making it ineffective and impractical in both roles.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2021/06/08 05:37:50
Subject: Sisters of Battle 2019 Codex Tactics
|
 |
Archmagos Veneratus Extremis
On the Internet
|
Lammia wrote: ClockworkZion wrote:Lammia wrote:yukishiro1 wrote:It's a better balanced book, I'm really not sure it's a more interesting book. What made sisters interesting in the past was their rough edges and weird rules, and a lot of those got toned down.
And what got added is mostly pretty generic stuff - the new units are all pretty bland, prayers C&Ped from the standard formulas, upgrades that function exactly the same as the ad mech ones, etc etc. It doesn't really feel like a book written by someone who loved the faction, it feels like a book written by someone brought in to standardize things.
I'd agree but this book added some clear dud options to the book, like tanks. With that it's hard to say it's better balanced.
Saint C and the twins are also a design nightmare that they've brought back...
Tanks are a game wide issue, not just a Sisters one. They need to do something to fix the tanks themselves to make them worth taking.
As for Celestine I think they've done a lot to clean her up. In fact we now have 3 mixed units and they all have a "X must take wounds first" rule baked in.
"Make the Exocist worse" was actively not the way to improve tanks though.
Feels more like they're standardizing the statline of the Rhino chassis or treating it like a Whirlwind. I'm not saying it was a good change but the problem is greater than nerfing the Exorcist's statline.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2021/06/08 05:56:16
Subject: Re:Sisters of Battle 2019 Codex Tactics
|
 |
Lone Wolf Sentinel Pilot
|
Repentia might be the best damage dealer for melee in the book, but i'm starting to like sacresant who trade 1 point of damage for best armour in the book (with halberds). Also, the castigator seems decent platform of firepower against both anti infantry and tanks.
|
Wh40k, necromunda, Mordheim |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2021/06/08 06:37:09
Subject: Sisters of Battle 2019 Codex Tactics
|
 |
Been Around the Block
|
yukishiro1 wrote:It doesn't really feel like a book written by someone who loved the faction, it feels like a book written by someone brought in to standardize things.
I agree with this and think it's probably the main reason for the lack of excitement around the book.
After DE and Admech,.which were clearly written by people who loved the factions and wanted them to be cool (and struggled to balance a faction the had so much affection for...), the Sisters book feels like they were less concerned about the way it felt to play and more about putting out a balanced book.
Nexrons and Space Marines feel the same as Sisters to me.
It is _really_ hard to be objective about the rules of the faction you love, the DE book especially shows this. Everything is written in a way that makes it 'cool' at the expensive of balance.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2021/06/08 06:43:57
Subject: Sisters of Battle 2019 Codex Tactics
|
 |
Archmagos Veneratus Extremis
On the Internet
|
shabadoit wrote:yukishiro1 wrote:It doesn't really feel like a book written by someone who loved the faction, it feels like a book written by someone brought in to standardize things.
I agree with this and think it's probably the main reason for the lack of excitement around the book.
After DE and Admech,.which were clearly written by people who loved the factions and wanted them to be cool (and struggled to balance a faction the had so much affection for...), the Sisters book feels like they were less concerned about the way it felt to play and more about putting out a balanced book.
Nexrons and Space Marines feel the same as Sisters to me.
It is _really_ hard to be objective about the rules of the faction you love, the DE book especially shows this. Everything is written in a way that makes it 'cool' at the expensive of balance.
I feel like most of the love was directed towards Crusade with the whole saint point system. The new stuff also feels like a lot of thought and attention was put into it as well. That said, there are a lot less sharp edges to grab people with this book, at least from what we know right now and the limited information we can gather from fuzzy screenshots of book reviews.
Details have most certainly been missed in those reviews (can't blame them considering the short amount of prep time they had) and who knows what'll start coming out from the books once people have them in hand to dig into. Plus there is an initial shock that people need to get over about the changes since many of them seem worse until you actually dig into them some more. It'll take the internet a bit of time to compare things completely.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2021/06/08 09:27:16
Subject: Sisters of Battle 2019 Codex Tactics
|
 |
Been Around the Block
|
^ agree with this.
On reflection, I think the book is probably better than the 8th one was at release.
That had a bunch of dud units (dominions, pen engines, honestly even retributors were questionable...), and it wasn't until the changes to Power Swords and Melta at the start of 9th that a bunch of the units suddenly became great.
Tanks aside, and tanks as mentioned aren't a sister problem alone, I think everything in the book is at least _useable_, even Celestians and Warsuits will work in the right list.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2021/06/08 09:51:40
Subject: Sisters of Battle 2019 Codex Tactics
|
 |
Regular Dakkanaut
|
As I've said before, I fear mortals as a big danger point for the sacresants. I don't think they rate in a bloody rose list, pretty much my entire meta can put out the mortals to take them down.
Valorous has the native 5+++ against mortals, and argent has a 4+++ that can be poppped when a mortal is about to happen so thats nice.
Both have some degree of synergy with retributors (but oh no you might have to spend 1cp).
Even then, I don't think 5 ferried by dominions is anywhere near sturdy enough.
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/06/08 09:53:14
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2021/06/08 11:17:28
Subject: Sisters of Battle 2019 Codex Tactics
|
 |
Lone Wolf Sentinel Pilot
|
dammit wrote:As I've said before, I fear mortals as a big danger point for the sacresants. I don't think they rate in a bloody rose list, pretty much my entire meta can put out the mortals to take them down.
Valorous has the native 5+++ against mortals, and argent has a 4+++ that can be poppped when a mortal is about to happen so thats nice.
Both have some degree of synergy with retributors (but oh no you might have to spend 1cp).
Even then, I don't think 5 ferried by dominions is anywhere near sturdy enough.
Hospitaller can give them 6+++, and revive d3 models per turn. In addittion, you'll have 6s to deny psychic powers. And if i'm not mistaken, one stratagem can give one of your units sacred rite (5+ deny) in addittion/ instead of the current rite.
|
Wh40k, necromunda, Mordheim |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2021/06/08 11:27:30
Subject: Sisters of Battle 2019 Codex Tactics
|
 |
Been Around the Block
|
Point for point, they're no more susceptible to mortals than DG terminators and not massively worse off than Bladeguard, which is something to keep in mind.
If you push 5 up in a rhino, you're pretty much offering them as a trade. But for 70/75 points I'm probably okay with that.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2021/06/08 11:51:21
Subject: Re:Sisters of Battle 2019 Codex Tactics
|
 |
Lone Wolf Sentinel Pilot
|
Here's something i've built for bloody rose;
Still some leftover points for upgrading, I think it's a decent start, it plays nicely objectives, and does not give easily purge the enemy points.
|
Wh40k, necromunda, Mordheim |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2021/06/08 13:26:27
Subject: Sisters of Battle 2019 Codex Tactics
|
 |
Been Around the Block
|
I like it. I think it'd be fun and would play missions well enough.
I'd look at getting a diagolus or dogmata in though, even at the expensive of the Imagifier. I also think maces are better in Bloody Rose, but halberds are cooler so there is that.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2021/06/08 13:57:37
Subject: Sisters of Battle 2019 Codex Tactics
|
 |
Dakka Veteran
|
I'd actually drop an Exorcist from that list and try to get some Battle Sister squads in there. Exorcist can sleaze the stratagem the first couple of rounds when needed to stay safe, but having two kinda means one needs to become exposed. And you're automatically starting 3 CP down due to using a Vanguard instead of a Battalion. Foot sisters also give you something to settle in on objectives to score points while your heat-seeking missiles distract the eye-line of your opponent.
I think Exorcists are still decent, but are going to be victims of diminishing returns with their weakened stat line without the comfort of Devastating Refrain to keep 'em safe while you deal with the things that can fry 'em.
Edit: Forgot to explicitly point out: I believe CP are going to be super valuable for our armies, so taking 3 CP dings for specialist detachments is a lot worse now. That's the heart of why I think there needs to be more battle sisters instead of the second Exorcist.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/06/08 13:59:15
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2021/06/08 14:32:40
Subject: Re:Sisters of Battle 2019 Codex Tactics
|
 |
Regular Dakkanaut
|
ZergSmasher wrote:Personally I think Sacresants are better than Repentia, although both most likely have their uses. Repentia are an elimination threat; you throw them at something you want dead, and it dies, and then they die. Sacresants are more of a brawler type of unit; able to take hits and still dish out decent damage with their D2 maces.
And I still think putting MM in a bunch of MSU Argent Shroud squads is better than running Retributors because of the reroll ability. Plus you don't have all your eggs in one basket. Depending on what else is in the list, you could probably still take one or two Retributor units to bring in from reserves for spike damage. Hell, go MSU a bit with those also, taking only a couple of MM and a Cherub so you can get a little more concentrated firepower in a couple of places.
1 MM and a combi-melta in a 5-model squad, especially now that you must take 10 to get an extra meltagun, isn't going to put out anywhere near the damage 4MM. And two 5-model squads each with a MM and combi-melta is less efficient than either melta-minions or MM Retributors.
Two units of 5 Battle Sisters armed with one combi-melta and one MM is 170 points.
One unit of melta-minions with a combi-weapon is 110
One unit of MM Rets is 150.
Both of the last two units will do the same or more damage for 20-60 points less.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Spreelock wrote:dammit wrote:As I've said before, I fear mortals as a big danger point for the sacresants. I don't think they rate in a bloody rose list, pretty much my entire meta can put out the mortals to take them down.
Valorous has the native 5+++ against mortals, and argent has a 4+++ that can be poppped when a mortal is about to happen so thats nice.
Both have some degree of synergy with retributors (but oh no you might have to spend 1cp).
Even then, I don't think 5 ferried by dominions is anywhere near sturdy enough.
Hospitaller can give them 6+++, and revive d3 models per turn. In addittion, you'll have 6s to deny psychic powers. And if i'm not mistaken, one stratagem can give one of your units sacred rite (5+ deny) in addittion/ instead of the current rite.
There's Battle Rites, which still changes a Sacred Rite for your army with a randomly determined that isn't current active for your army. Then, there's a relic that can be given to a Superior (or other character) that gives that unit TWO Sacred Rites of your choice, selected before determine Rites for your army. Then, until the end of the battle, those rites are active for the bearer's unit instead of the ones the rest of your army has. Automatically Appended Next Post: Also, there's a Hymn one your Sororitas priests can recite to give a friendly Sororitas Core or Character unit a Sacred Rite that isn't active for your army and is in addition to the ones already affecting the unit.
|
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2021/06/08 15:10:20
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2021/06/08 15:33:35
Subject: Re:Sisters of Battle 2019 Codex Tactics
|
 |
Lone Wolf Sentinel Pilot
|
Nice, thanks. So, there's alot of things to consider, and the codex isn't even out yet
The bloody rose is really intresting, as melee options have good synergy;
- extra attack and ap first round of combat
- sacred rite (the passion) for exploding 6s in melee
- imagifier auras with tale of warrior and tale of faithful (+1S, reroll advance and charge)
|
Wh40k, necromunda, Mordheim |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2021/06/08 15:36:11
Subject: Sisters of Battle 2019 Codex Tactics
|
 |
Dakka Veteran
|
The problem with comparing 2 BSS with 1x melta vs 1 Dom or 1 Ret squad is that you're totally discounting everything outside of raw weapon efficiency.
Both Doms and Rets begin degrading as soon as they're looked at, neither can hold multiple objectives individually.
This is why the efficiency arguments are so off-putting for me. We pretend the game is about blasting efficiency when there is so little actually riding on the outcome of destroying the opponent. Sure, it is nice to blast the other guy off the table with hyper-specialized units that do what you tap them to, usually very inefficiently at times with overkill. But threat distribution, guiding more enemy fire into bolter sisters, and the ability to control the table with a mix of offense and defense will probably win you more games. The two-turn kill is super appealing... until it doesn't work.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2021/06/08 16:09:18
Subject: Sisters of Battle 2019 Codex Tactics
|
 |
Archmagos Veneratus Extremis
On the Internet
|
A point in favor of BSS: objective secured. Incredibly important in an objective based edition.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2021/06/08 17:37:25
Subject: Sisters of Battle 2019 Codex Tactics
|
 |
Pious Palatine
|
ClockworkZion wrote:shabadoit wrote:yukishiro1 wrote:It doesn't really feel like a book written by someone who loved the faction, it feels like a book written by someone brought in to standardize things.
I agree with this and think it's probably the main reason for the lack of excitement around the book.
After DE and Admech,.which were clearly written by people who loved the factions and wanted them to be cool (and struggled to balance a faction the had so much affection for...), the Sisters book feels like they were less concerned about the way it felt to play and more about putting out a balanced book.
Nexrons and Space Marines feel the same as Sisters to me.
It is _really_ hard to be objective about the rules of the faction you love, the DE book especially shows this. Everything is written in a way that makes it 'cool' at the expensive of balance.
I feel like most of the love was directed towards Crusade with the whole saint point system. The new stuff also feels like a lot of thought and attention was put into it as well. That said, there are a lot less sharp edges to grab people with this book, at least from what we know right now and the limited information we can gather from fuzzy screenshots of book reviews.
Details have most certainly been missed in those reviews (can't blame them considering the short amount of prep time they had) and who knows what'll start coming out from the books once people have them in hand to dig into. Plus there is an initial shock that people need to get over about the changes since many of them seem worse until you actually dig into them some more. It'll take the internet a bit of time to compare things completely.
I disagree about the new stuff having thought and attention.
Paragons are mediocre copiea of mortifiers, sacresants are just armored repentia, the castigator is just a bad old exorcist, hymns are just bad auras, the banner lady is just a bad primaris ancient the dogmata is just a bad bikeless chaplain.
Everything is either a direct copy of something else or a toned down version of something better.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2021/06/08 18:16:17
Subject: Sisters of Battle 2019 Codex Tactics
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
Yeah, the new stuff (I don't pay any attention to crusade, no idea there) is all derivative stuff that existed in other books already, there's not really anything unique or interesting. And the unique stuff that sisters did have generally got reduced in importance - e.g. nerfs to miracle dice generation, making the Triumph a sad shadow of itself, etc. Celestine is the one place in the book where they took something from the 8th edition book and made it weirder and more unique, not less.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2021/06/08 19:05:25
Subject: Re:Sisters of Battle 2019 Codex Tactics
|
 |
Pious Palatine
|
Spreelock wrote:Nice, thanks. So, there's alot of things to consider, and the codex isn't even out yet
The bloody rose is really intresting, as melee options have good synergy;
- extra attack and ap first round of combat
- sacred rite (the passion) for exploding 6s in melee
- imagifier auras with tale of warrior and tale of faithful (+1S, reroll advance and charge)
We already had all of that. In fact, it's worse that the previous book because th AP used be be permanent and also worked on pistols. Automatically Appended Next Post: dammit wrote:As I've said before, I fear mortals as a big danger point for the sacresants. I don't think they rate in a bloody rose list, pretty much my entire meta can put out the mortals to take them down.
Valorous has the native 5+++ against mortals, and argent has a 4+++ that can be poppped when a mortal is about to happen so thats nice.
Both have some degree of synergy with retributors (but oh no you might have to spend 1cp).
Even then, I don't think 5 ferried by dominions is anywhere near sturdy enough.
At the end of the day They're 1 wound t3 models, even with a 2+4++ they die to bolter fire and intercessor attacks. If they spend their mortal wound abilities on them that's a HUGE win.
Sacrosants are Repentia. They function the same way repentia do. They jump out of a rhino or outflank, kill one important thing and die.
The difference between the two is that sacrosants have to go after softer targets than repentia BUT in exchange for that your opponent actually has to dedicate a shooting unit to killing them instead of just using hull mounted stormbolters.
They're probably the best of the new non-morvenn units but they're not exactly Deathguard terminators or Deathwing Knights.
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/06/08 19:26:39
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2021/06/08 19:50:57
Subject: Sisters of Battle 2019 Codex Tactics
|
 |
Archmagos Veneratus Extremis
On the Internet
|
ERJAK wrote:
I disagree about the new stuff having thought and attention.
Paragons are mediocre copiea of mortifiers, sacresants are just armored repentia, the castigator is just a bad old exorcist, hymns are just bad auras, the banner lady is just a bad primaris ancient the dogmata is just a bad bikeless chaplain.
Everything is either a direct copy of something else or a toned down version of something better.
A copy how? By sharing a similar statline and no special rules? You are reaching to justify your hate of the book and coming up short.
No one is forcing you to like it but stop crapping up the tactics thread with this nonsense. Maybe go start a salt thread on 40k General if all you want to do is complain aboug how bad you think everything is. This thread is supposed to be focused on tactics of what wr have, not bashing the army based on what we don't.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
yukishiro1 wrote:Yeah, the new stuff (I don't pay any attention to crusade, no idea there) is all derivative stuff that existed in other books already, there's not really anything unique or interesting. And the unique stuff that sisters did have generally got reduced in importance - e.g. nerfs to miracle dice generation, making the Triumph a sad shadow of itself, etc. Celestine is the one place in the book where they took something from the 8th edition book and made it weirder and more unique, not less.
You mean the Imperium army who uses Imperium equipment and has stuff made for them by the Mechanicus who makes all the Imperium's equipment has stuff similar to other Imperium armies? s/I would have never expected that./s
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/06/08 19:55:29
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2021/06/08 19:53:33
Subject: Sisters of Battle 2019 Codex Tactics
|
 |
Dakka Veteran
|
Quick lesson about 40k: Everything dies.
The fact that Sacrosancts take more than Havoc Launchers and hull-mounted Stormbolters to remove is the WHOLE POINT. It is what makes them different than Repentia. Many things in melee aren't rocking the AP stats of guns, either, so that 2+/4++ means A LOT more than the 6++/5+++. They don't function similarly nor address the same problems that Repentia do.
I know we're just trying to be nit-picky and salty here, I've noticed that trend when new stuff comes out. Remember how "sky is falling" when the beta and 8th codices came out, by many of the same people here? I do. Same names. Those analyses were WAY off back then, and I imagine they're just as inaccurate now.
Sisters were never supposed to hit as hard as Drukhari, and weren't supposed to take hits as well as any Astartes. But the fact is, we take hits better than Drukhari for the most part, and can hit harder than Astartes as a whole. So trying to go toe-to-toe with the premier defensive or offensive factions in the game is just a lesson in frustration. If you want to blast everything away with Raiders and Dark Lances and Wytches and find that Sisters aren't providing that experience... there may be some more Drukhari boxes in stock to purchase. But sitting in here and moaning about how awful everything is just looks petty and is DEFINITELY not helpful in any regard. So let's shift away from that talk and onto what the army CAN do.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2021/06/08 20:06:45
Subject: Sisters of Battle 2019 Codex Tactics
|
 |
Archmagos Veneratus Extremis
On the Internet
|
@Tempest: well said.
To add to that, Sisters are traditionally what I call a short-range "elite horde". They're more durable than your typical horde army, but are too squishy and cheap to be an elite army (around 5th as we were around 1.5 Sisters to 1 Marine and we're to 1.8 Sisters to 1 Marine now in body count) Most of their work is done inside of 24" (often skirting 12"). I don't think this has really changed, even though we have more long range options, and we gained more melee options.
At the end of the day when you get down to it Sisters largely still play the way they always have, they've just gained more tools.
As for Sacrosancts, I've used Crusaders in the past as an anvil to get in and tie stuff up for a turn or two or just protect things with their good saves. Honestly I feel that they fit the same role, only better.
At 14ppm they're cheap enough to toss in to a combat to tie up a unit without feeling a real pinch, but they also fight decently well to take some models down with them. Their durability is better too so they won't fold as easilly while helping control what your opponent can engage thanks to their ability to heroically intervene as well.
|
This message was edited 5 times. Last update was at 2021/06/08 20:23:45
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2021/06/08 22:02:29
Subject: Re:Sisters of Battle 2019 Codex Tactics
|
 |
Sister Vastly Superior
Germany - Bodensee/Ravensburg area
|
I usually really like Goonhammer's Codex reviews and think they are spot on 98% of the time, but you can't just claim the Codex has "much improved internal balance" and then preceed the entry of every single HQ unit with the sentence "ye, quite good, probably, but just take Vahl". Sure, sub-faction balance is improved, which I like, but there is too many heavy handed hard nerfs to units, the type resulting in lots of models ending up in shelves to gather dust.
Not really all that happy with the Codex, and not just because of us getting another Codex after less than 16 months (not to mention those of us who didn't get a single game in with the 2020 Codex because of the pandemic ...), rather one for a faction that desparately needs one, like Tau. Guess Sisters sold that crazy that we are now getting the sort of "most favorite son" treatment from GW that was previously only reserved for Marines, lmao
While it certainly buffs quite a few units, the units it nerfs hard like Exorcists or Non-Heavy-Flamer Retributors, it nerfs in such a questionably fundamental way that it'll be an issue until the next Codex release. The Codex's power is artifically buoyed up with Vahl's utter overpoweredness, and even besides me being very much against any sort of "so crazy good, cheap and flawless you would be absolutely slowed not to always take it" unit in a general sense, we all know how hard the rules writers are nerfing overperforming units (or previously very well performing and common tournament double- or triple take units like Exorcists) these days.
Vahl will swamp Tourneys, then 100% be hit hard with the nerf hammer, repeatedly, within months, probably to the point she ends up not worth taking at all (because boy is it hard to properly price a unit with absolutely no downsides with which you can use to justify adjusting the final point cost downward a bit, including disadvantages like being limited to a overall lower strength Order/subfaction). Meanwhile Retributors losing both the Strategem AND not being able to move and fire Heavy Weapons without penalty (which any Devastator-style unit should have, IMO) can now only be compensated by point costs after the Codex release, and they are already down to 12 points per model, while the writers are extremely unlikely to change the price of something as common as "Multi-Melta" because it affects too many units in the Codex, so what is going to happen, another singular -1 point drop per model?
Or the poor Exorcist. It would have to drop a huge amount of points to compensate for:
1) -1 Toughness, despite being a very expensive direct fire tank
2) -1 Nerf to AP
3) - No CORE, so pretty much most Aura buffs being out.
Will that happen? Probably not, because GW seems to be overvaluating battle tanks a lot this Edition and not consider how much of a nerf not being CORE is. We'll probably get like a -5 or -10 point cost adjustment and that's it.
Meanwhile Seraphim can be happy they have Hand Flamers as an option (and that they are getting buffed with S4 and the previously Ebon Chalice Strat. becoming general issue), because boy would they be dead without it.
The Admech Codex seems much better thought out: Buffs to tons of unit so they become options worth taking in various ways, the nerfed units (excluding regular Servitors, lmao) are still good or definitely playable even with a shifted focus (Kastelan Robots you now run with 2x Blasters and one Fist and advance them onto an objective and munch things when there). And units that were nerfed without worthwhile point drops were already priced at very attractive price points to still keep them as good units, such as the Onager Dunecrawler (which is the sort of price point the Exorcist should probably have, ~135-140 points). Sure, Lazor chickens are the new AT hotness, but you can still run 2 Crabs and feel absolutely fine about it because they are good, versatile and well priced without haven taken a wrench to the fundamental way they work and get their job done. And while their old Codex was still good, a new Codex was absolutely justified with the last one being 4 years old.
That said, as an Ebon Chalice player, my favorite Order got quite a bit better and Heavy Flamer Retributors are absolute blenders with the Flamer-buff strategems available through EC and general strategems, not to mention Seraphim delivering the sort of turn 1 deepstrike hurt we are used to, even if against a different type of target. And that's on top of probably being the second best order in melee thanks to getting to pick TWO melee buffing Sacred Rites.
|
This message was edited 31 times. Last update was at 2021/06/08 22:44:21
Dark it was, and dire of form
the beast that laid them low
Hrothgar's sharpened frost-forged blade
to deal a fatal blow
he stalked and hunted day and night
and came upon it's lair
With sword and shield Hrothgar fought
and earned the name of slayer
- The saga of Hrothgar the Beastslayer |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2021/06/08 22:47:15
Subject: Sisters of Battle 2019 Codex Tactics
|
 |
Archmagos Veneratus Extremis
On the Internet
|
On the surface a lot of stuff looka worse but it's been shown that most of it saw side grades instead of straight downgrades. Like less than a percentage difference worse.
And Vahl is obviously good, but she's a points bump away from being shelved entirely.
Honestly I don't think Goonhammer had a lot of time with this book to really dig into how much stuff changed or if it really shifted as much as it looks when you look at it without digging deeper. Not their fault entirely since SEO means they need to be up early when the embargo drops but books have been coming late.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/06/08 22:48:01
|
|
 |
 |
|