Jump to content

Why the different stats on Arcos?


dizzy-xc

Recommended Posts

From the latest GK codex and the new White Dwarf, the Arco stats are different. Despite not having hands, the SoB version gives them BS3 and S4, while the GK version has BS1 and S5. Why? Why cant GW be consistent? Is there a reason a model without ranged weapons has BS3? Is there a reason they are different? Is it a mistake? Spelling edit.
Link to comment
https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/236526-why-the-different-stats-on-arcos/
Share on other sites

I think it is because of a couple of reasons.

 

1. Its two different books and unfortunately sometimes that just means things are different. When adding units and stats you have to consider the army as a whole and not just the unit itself. Maybe someone decided for whatever reason that having arco's as they are in the GK book would be unbalanced in the SoB WD update.

 

2. The second and more likely reason in my opinion, is that its just a WD pamphlet army. In all likelyhood it wasn't thought out very well because it is just a stopgap measure until the actual Sisters of Battle codex is worked on/finished.

In my opinion its a couple of things - 1) a stupid oversight/mistake; 2) who wrote it (which is more of an explaination for point 1 than anything else).

 

Mat Ward couldn't even notice that the Arcos in the SoB list weren't consistant with those in the GK Codex that he was lead writer on? Even considering the fact that theres no real reason (game balance or fluff) that they should differ? Quite likely.

Because GW couldn't be stuffed getting off their lazy behinds and realizing that what they wrote in the SoB WD is not consistant with anything else they wrote that got a lot more attention in a real codex.

Like also how you see a SoB Retributor with a MB but is actually just a heavy flamer. Poor corrections, rules and a half-as@ed job at best.

 

Now i'm not going to say all is not good with the WD release, some are better. But over-all it just shows how much GW don't care for your opinions, your desires to spend money on their games, or that your actually having a say really means less than the paper GW printed this WD crap on.

The WD codex is intended to throw the SoB players a bone and sell a few more copies.

 

I hope they don't end up like the BA players, spending years with a pdf and then getting accused of cheese when they finaly DO get a decent codex.

The WD codex is intended to throw the SoB players a bone and sell a few more copies.

 

I hope they don't end up like the BA players, spending years with a pdf and then getting accused of cheese when they finaly DO get a decent codex.

 

I'm not certain its throwing us a bone yet (maybe whackign us upside the head :D ). One of two things must happen in the next half of the dex for this list to be competetive and I believe neither is likley but I try to remain hopeful. 1) Points must drop dramatically so that you can throw a large amount of whatever at your opponent as quantity can be its own quality in 5th edition 40K. 2) The wargear section must give us some new weapons thaqt are pretty killer like Grey Knights got as well as some strong unit/army buff type objects.

 

Sadly this being a White Dwarf and a Sisters codex I don't think that number 2 can happen at all. I suppose stranger things have happened, but given how Sisters have been treated in the past I don't expect it. Despite my negative comments I am tryign to remian positive that somethign good will come of this codex.

The WD codex is intended to throw the SoB players a bone and sell a few more copies.

 

I hope they don't end up like the BA players, spending years with a pdf and then getting accused of cheese when they finaly DO get a decent codex.

 

As a BA player that experienced this and then a whole heaping pile of teasing and ridicule about BA being BA only to have an Ultra player jump aboard the new codex to WAAC (he calls them 'Ultrabloods'. I appreciate this. :D

 

 

 

 

Likely it is a very poor oversight. Someone probably didnt clue in that they do have Arcos in GK for some reason. They do try and keep things the same as shown by weapons and more recently Harlequins

I think the points will come down, but we'll have to see if the drop is competitive enough.

 

Heh, unless the wargear is real exotic and cheap, IMO, a "competitive" price drop would mean bolter toting power armored better than IG troop stat line would end up cheaper than the mentioned IG infantry squad.

 

Although, who knows, cheap specialty ammunition could cover a whole lot of the current flaws.

Mat Ward couldn't even notice that the Arcos in the SoB list weren't consistant with those in the GK Codex that he was lead writer on? Even considering the fact that theres no real reason (game balance or fluff) that they should differ? Quite likely.

Mat Ward wrote the WD SoB Codex? I was under the impression that someone else was going to write it (I don't know because I don't buy WD anymore).

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.