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.

drakerocket wrote:
Yeah no one wants their army to be 'okay'. They would like their army to be competitive and competitive does not mean 'okay". Drukhari were an outlier, though they have been swiftly adjusted. Outside of them (and whatever admech does), there were about 4-5 armies winning tournaments; sisters were one of those. They weren't winning all of them, but they were a top tier army. If they are nerfed, particularly after two armies have come out which are stronger than them (drukhari and admech), then they will be bumped down. Why would you want that if they are your army?

If their top tier (Bloody rose) is lowered and then other orders are brought up to that new lowered state...then they will be overall nerfed. Given that they aren't the top of the heap (drukhari/admech hold that) but are pretty even with the top tier armies...that's actually a perfectly reasonable place to want to stay. If they lose power they slip to middle of the pack and...who wants to be there?

Mind you, we don't have the whole picture. Too early to tell. But overall I think sisters are in a great place; they aren't horribly oppressive and they are really good. That's where you want your army to be.

And this is why gw keeps arms race. It makes more money as players don't want balance but their army be the next op thing.

Lammia wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

NewTruthNeomaxim wrote:
I feel like a shoe hasn't dropped thanks to incomplete info. Bloody Rose is vaguely intact, and other Orders look better, meaning I expect Repentia and/or Retributor nerfs to break their viability.

As I mentioned a couple posts ago, I assume Repentia won't be Core.

I'm expecting the priest changes to kick them.

Also, I'm expect changes to Missionaries and Preachers that we haven't seen.

Repentia are good, but their usefulness has only gone backwards with each codex release

I feel like Repentia will remain useful as a single unit, but taking a massive mumber of them is likely nerfed.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

ERJAK wrote:

Are you talking like codexes in general or SoB codexes? Because the last one was the first codex where they were useful. Also, core means very little for repentia. Assuming they still get some kind of offensive buff from repentia superiors, it's honestly only a couple of percent loss to take those instead of imagifiers or preachers

The bigger issue is that if they're nerfing Order of Our Martyrd Lady, a darkhorse pick at BEST, that sets the tone that EVERYTHING in the codex is being nerfed in some way or another. So far it's only been small nerfs but who knows what's lurking deeper into the book?

Despite what the internet says Repentia were good in the past. You had to work around Rage in 5th ed but I can attest to a unit of them turning anything they touched to mist for a long time.

They're better in the current codex, but I swore by a unit of them in 5th and 6th starting with C:WH and the White Dwarf codex. The digital only one was more meh all around though.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
So to catch up: if you use Judith she'll likely be locked to the OoML trait if she's your warlord. Not sure how I feel about it at the moment.

As for the book getting some softer touches in places, making the internal balance stronger is a good thing even if the book isn't made stronger externally. More variety for the army is always a net positive.

And we don't have 90% of the rules in the book. We haven't seen the Rites yet, nor the stratagems, specifics of Miracle Dice or even how they're changing the units to match their new points costs. Frankly I don't think we need to go full Chicken Little just because Becky and her Power Paddle Pals got a nerf.

Then again I played Sisters from 5th into 7th so I may have built up the ability to take it on the chin when GW nerfs the army.

tneva82 wrote:

drakerocket wrote:
Yeah no one wants their army to be 'okay'. They would like their army to be competitive and competitive does not mean 'okay". Drukhari were an outlier, though they have been swiftly adjusted. Outside of them (and whatever admech does), there were about 4-5 armies winning tournaments; sisters were one of those. They weren't winning all of them, but they were a top tier army. If they are nerfed, particularly after two armies have come out which are stronger than them (drukhari and admech), then they will be bumped down. Why would you want that if they are your army?

If their top tier (Bloody rose) is lowered and then other orders are brought up to that new lowered state...then they will be overall nerfed. Given that they aren't the top of the heap (drukhari/admech hold that) but are pretty even with the top tier armies...that's actually a perfectly reasonable place to want to stay. If they lose power they slip to middle of the pack and...who wants to be there?

Mind you, we don't have the whole picture. Too early to tell. But overall I think sisters are in a great place; they aren't horribly oppressive and they are really good. That's where you want your army to be.

And this is why gw keeps arms race. It makes more money as players don't want balance but their army be the next op thing.

Yep. Honestly never thought I'd see the day where people are getting mad the idea that it's better for new releases to be balanced than overpowered, but there you go I guess.

I want everybody to be "in the middle of the pack." And you don't get there by making each new book more powerful than the last. Drukhari just got nerfed pretty significantly; if ad mech turns out to be as oppressive as it initially looks, it'll be nerfed too. It's a lot better for the game for new books to come out in the fat middle than to push the power level ever higher.

Agreed on the middle of the pack sentiment. To steal something from Warhammer Weekly if we drew faction power on a bell curve we'd want as many things in the "fat middle" of that curve as possible. The game is just healthier that way.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
Agreed on the middle of the pack sentiment. To steal something from Warhammer Weekly if we drew faction power on a bell curve we'd want as many things in the "fat middle" of that curve as possible. The game is just healthier that way.

That just ends up with the fat middle being irrelevant. This isn't math class, we don't just get to ignore the outliers.

Due to how slow updates are, this is closer to how competitive sports work. You're either a great team or you suck. Notice how there's not a whole lot of talk among Fifa teams about making sure they end up middle of the pack?

If your book is not able to at least somewhat consistently compete with the best book, it's bad. That's the nature of competition.

That's the nature of professional competition, certainly.

But the _books_ aren't where 40k has its competitions. Those are between players. If there are blatantly 'best books' that's a failure, not an achievement.
And a failure that renders the player competitions meaningless, since its no longer about them, just which books most blatantly failed the production process.

ERJAK wrote:
Due to how slow updates are

These updates are not slow. We're looking at one codex a month roughly.

ERJAK wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
Agreed on the middle of the pack sentiment. To steal something from Warhammer Weekly if we drew faction power on a bell curve we'd want as many things in the "fat middle" of that curve as possible. The game is just healthier that way.

That just ends up with the fat middle being irrelevant. This isn't math class, we don't just get to ignore the outliers.

Due to how slow updates are, this is closer to how competitive sports work. You're either a great team or you suck. Notice how there's not a whole lot of talk among Fifa teams about making sure they end up middle of the pack?

If your book is not able to at least somewhat consistently compete with the best book, it's bad. That's the nature of competition.

It's not that the outliers are ignored, they're nerfed or buffed as needed to push them into the middle. The goal is to bring the armies closer together in terms of power, not keep chasing whomever is on top.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Voss wrote:
That's the nature of professional competition, certainly.

But the _books_ aren't where 40k has its competitions. Those are between players. If there are blatantly 'best books' that's a failure, not an achievement.
And a failure that renders the player competitions meaningless, since its no longer about them, just which books most blatantly failed the production process.

Very much this. Nerfing codexes is like putting a governor on a race car so the focus can be on the skill of the driver not who spent the most money on horsepower. The goal should always be to bring books closer together both internally and externally so that the game can focus more on playing the mission and outplaying your opponent than having the best army of the month.

So the Dogmata has:
*Two head options
*Two mace head options
*Two backpack icon options

Shame the model is so poorly posed, since I'm all for GW giving customization options, but I can't see myself buying more than one of them, if that.



Also, dang the Sacrosanct looks good in white.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

ERJAK wrote:
Due to how slow updates are

These updates are not slow. We're looking at one codex a month roughly.

Maybe compared to the past, but we're still talking one codex a month for 20+ factions, which if GW concentrated purely on would still take two years (this is assuming that Space Marines don't get a fresh round of 9.5 codices which would push the number up to near 30). They don't concentrate on them, though, and 40k codices have to share space with major AoS releases as well as supplemental books such as The Book of Rust. This is on top of any covid delays.

We're 8 months into 9th and we've been so front loaded with Space Marines and other tanky factions that we're just now getting to the first horde armies, and some armies are in pretty desperate need of updates, both in model quality and with rules. If someone plays GSC, IG, Tau, etc., I'm sure the updates feel glacial, as they're not even given any design space in supplements.

I realise that this is the SoB thread, but there isn't a general 40k thread like there is for AoS (for reasons that still elude me), but it's worth pointing out that Lord Felthius + Cohort has returned to pre-order status on the Oz website.

 GaroRobe wrote:



Also, dang the Sacrosanct looks good in white.

I think the black would look good as well without the smears of blue all over the models.
The white armor has good contrast with the black robes, but its mostly saved by virtue of not being 'edge highlighted' and 'weapon glowed' to death.

Don't care about in game utility, but my sacrosancts will definitely be rocking halberds....looks good.

I'm even more impressed with the Sacrosanct models than when we first saw them.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I'm even more impressed with the Sacrosanct models than when we first saw them.

I kind of want to get them and kitbash them with Battle Sisters bits to make regular Celestians. The backpacks and hoods just make them stand out so much better as Celestians than the actual Celestian kit.

Really look good in white. Wasnt a big fan of them when i saw the first pic, but this paintjob made me change my mind

 bullyboy wrote:
Don't care about in game utility, but my sacrosancts will definitely be rocking halberds....looks good.

They look good until you realise they can't possibly wield them effectively, as their off-hand is occupied with both a pistol and a shield.

I kinda want to convert some to be holding their halberd two-handed with a smaller buckler-type shield and their pistol holstered, but I suspect that might be more work than is really justifiable...

 Duskweaver wrote:

 bullyboy wrote:
Don't care about in game utility, but my sacrosancts will definitely be rocking halberds....looks good.

They look good until you realise they can't possibly wield them effectively, as their off-hand is occupied with both a pistol and a shield.

I kinda want to convert some to be holding their halberd two-handed with a smaller buckler-type shield and their pistol holstered, but I suspect that might be more work than is really justifiable...

*sigh* Spears can be used one handed. Lets not start this again.

True. Easier to brace vs incoming and poke than slash like halberd

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I'm even more impressed with the Sacrosanct models than when we first saw them.

They really are gorgeous.


Anybody else notice the spoilers in the datacards? Ebon Chalice auto 6 shots for flamers got moved to a general strat AND affects adeptus ministorum units instead of just <Order> (i.e. penitent engines and mortifiers).

The +1 to run and charge sacred rite has stayed the same as well.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Goonhammer review is up with full spoilers

Nasty nerf to beneficence. Going down to D1. It picks up a horde bonus but, no one really cares. Deadly descent is useless now so Seraphim go back on the shelf. Devastating refrain nuked. Paying CP for LoS breaking is gak.Storm of Retribution is just straight up gone, meaning Rets are probably back on the shelf. Holy rage nerfed to gak.

Relics see a lot more variety at the expense of the ones that used to be good being not good. Hymns are bad.

Some of the Goonhammer stuff is incorrect for those reading along. Ebon Chalice strat is different and Desperate for Redemption was mortal wounds on death, not fight twice for repentia.

The single biggest problem I'm seeing so far is that everything has to footslog or nothing works. Almost every buff has been moved to a command phase ability, which means NONE of them function with deepstrike OR transports.
They keep trying to make sacred right matter and they just...they just don't.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I realise that this is the SoB thread, but there isn't a general 40k thread like there is for AoS (for reasons that still elude me), but it's worth pointing out that Lord Felthius + Cohort has returned to pre-order status on the Oz website.

As a returning player to 9th, I just bought the DG codex (I think it's 9th - it has that new off-centre logo on it). I can't see any data sheets for Lord Felthius.
If he's a Lord of Contagion - fair enough, but what is the point of 3 Blightlord Terminators that have to be in groups of 5 minimum. There's no entry for a Lord to have a cohort.
I liked the look of the models, but why aren't rules in the new codex if this is a reprinted existing model?

Lammia wrote:
*sigh* Spears can be used one handed. Lets not start this again.

Spears can. Halberds can't. They are very different weapons.

 Duskweaver wrote:

Lammia wrote:
*sigh* Spears can be used one handed. Lets not start this again.

Spears can. Halberds can't. They are very different weapons.

Not really... Halberds are just poorly weighted

Hey, they realized Stern was gak! Good on them for figuring it out.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Lammia wrote:

 Duskweaver wrote:

Lammia wrote:
*sigh* Spears can be used one handed. Lets not start this again.

Spears can. Halberds can't. They are very different weapons.

Not really... Halberds are just poorly weighted

Halberds are just spears with a survival axe attachment. Kill the enemy with the point, build a house with axe. Boom, two for one.

Lammia wrote:
Not really... Halberds are just poorly weighted

You know what they call someone trying to wield a poorly-weighted weapon designed for two-handed use in one hand?

A casualty.

To clarify, though, halberd and shield is actually possible. As long as you have the shield attached in such a way that it leaves your off-hand free to help control the halberd. It's really the pistol in the off-hand (and secondarily the rather large size of the shield) that makes the Sacrisants with halberds look wrong.

Battle sisters bump up to 20 comes at the expense of MSU units no longer getting 2 specials.

Which is a doggak trade.

This book wants you to blob infantry sooooo badly. Imagifier is worthless for defense. -1 to wound for S3 attacks isn't even an ability. Repentia superior completely worthless. Yeah, let's have a character that can only buff a unit that doesn't have a save use their ability in the COMMAND phase. Stupid.

Paragons are terrible. Vehicles with a 6+ invul don't work for 80pts a pop. Zephyrim lose reroll to wounds, so they're gak.

And of course they nerf flails. I hate this book so goddamn much.

This book sounds amazing. I wasn't looking to use any obnoxious cheese builds that existed in the 8th codex so no nerfs in sight.

I think I saw a setup that gives a 20 sister unit 4++, counts as in cover (did i imagine this part?), transhuman for a turn, ap-1/-2 reduced by 1, counts as 40 for obsec.

That's a warrior blob+++

Also 48 auto hit s6 ap-1 from flamers on penitent engines/moritfiers. This codex really wants you to take flamers.

Also, goonhammer suggested the remove invuln miraculous ability was a once-per battle but that hasn't been supported by the text as far as I can see (the warcom article said once per battle but I read that as the upgrade that gives the miraculous ability can only be used once per battle).

 Duskweaver wrote:

Lammia wrote:
Not really... Halberds are just poorly weighted

You know what they call someone trying to wield a poorly-weighted weapon designed for two-handed use in one hand?

A casualty.

To clarify, though, halberd and shield is actually possible. As long as you have the shield attached in such a way that it leaves your off-hand free to help control the halberd. It's really the pistol in the off-hand (and secondarily the rather large size of the shield) that makes the Sacrisants with halberds look wrong.

We're talking about the weight of an unknown material in a post-hyperspace civ that has anti-grav tech...

You'd probably need some sort of powered armour to hold it.

dammit wrote:
This book sounds amazing. I wasn't looking to use any obnoxious cheese builds that existed in the 8th codex so no nerfs in sight.

I think I saw a setup that gives a 20 sister unit 4++, counts as in cover (did i imagine this part?), transhuman for a turn, ap-1/-2 reduced by 1, counts as 40 for obsec.

That's a warrior blob+++

What obnoxious cheese builds? Having 2 good units?

4++ is very difficult to get, cover is OOML only from Junith, Ap-1/2 VH mutually exclusive with Junith, what difference is 40 vs 20 going to make? 99.99% of Obsec situations are usually 1 model to 0 or like 2 vs 3. There's never a time where you're like 'Oh good thing I had 21 models on the objective, they might have taken it!

That's a bleh blob. It's probably our best strategy but it's a far cry from the multiple, varied options we had before.