Sisters Preview

[Mekhitar]

I'm sorry, I thought I remembered you saying something about how you had compiled the various leak / beta codex previews... I might be mistaking you for someone else. :/  I was hoping to compare what other people have gleaned from around the internets.  I've read a number of things, some of which contradict with each other directly, and have been trying to get them straight.

I am planning on picking up CA straight from the store next Saturday, but was hoping to get a clearer idea of what to expect, rather than notes thrown out into the interwebs by folks who by and large don't know sisters so well.

[ERJAK]

I'm sorry, I thought I remembered you saying something about how you had compiled the various leak / beta codex previews... I might be mistaking you for someone else. :/ I was hoping to compare what other people have gleaned from around the internets. I've read a number of things, some of which contradict with each other directly, and have been trying to get them straight.

 

I am planning on picking up CA straight from the store next Saturday, but was hoping to get a clearer idea of what to expect, rather than notes thrown out into the interwebs by folks who by and large don't know sisters so well.

That was a different guy, lol. If you search 'Sisters of battle chapter approved 2018' there's a 57 minute video of a guy who clearlt doesn't play sisters, convienently reading all of the rules and point costs verbatum.

[Purifying Tempest]

Let me try to hit this a bit more eloquently, after having a bit more time to prose my thoughts:

 

A little background into actually making games.  First and foremost is it has to be fun, for all players.  There are certain combinations the pop up that create "negative play experiences" (NPEs), these are the natural enemy of the designers.  Designers are undoubtedly more concerned with aspects of their product that create these NPEs than they are at making things 100% fair and balanced.  Heck, Chess has been around for hundreds of years and it is still unbalanced, the first player has a slight advantage throughout the game because he's always .5 turns ahead, and that is a strategic disadvantage that the second player is forced to overcome.  But balancing first turn wasn't something the designers spent years trying to overcome, so long as the product on the table was enjoyable.  Now that is one very MINOR aspect of a much less complicated game, but 40K has way more moving targets to try to control than chess does.  Look at how they handled things like deep strike, spam tyrants lists, Ynnari (though they're still trying to fix the last one, there).  Deep strike created scenarios where a player would be done before their first turn began.  Flyrants came with the perfect blend of speed, protection (deep strike), firepower, and defense that made playing against them very not exciting... especially if they could get the drop on you.  Grey Knights and Blood Angels dropping 75% of their points from deep strike reserve, leaving only slivers of the army that they didn't care about on the field in case they didn't go first gave them an immense advantage against players who couldn't... guaranteeing these lists had alpha strike privileges.  Psyker spam leveling armies with indefensible smites, characters shielding characters and forcing firepower into 1 specific model instead of being able to delegate threats normally with shooting.  Friggen rhino bunkers cheesing the word "visible" as they pivoted around to block LoS to other units while allowing a powerful shooting unit to snipe characters with impunity.  These all create NPEs, and these have all been remedied in short order by GW.  The actual balance isn't too far off in the game, and even when facing a more powerful army, so long as they haven't been leveraging some of the "cheesier" tactics that have no defense against them, the game is still not a terrible experience.  Even now they're trying to eliminate sudden death to get firepower-loaded armies another disadvantage to make them shift to armies able to punch and move/control.  That's a very long explanation of a very simple prospect of design, but it is important to understand them, because it is at the root of the problem I want to describe.

 

I'm going to be very blunt here to start things off for my thoughts on the codex, but it is the most important statement I can make: Acts of Faith as they exist are broken.  They create NPEs which damage the brand and ultimately damage our army.

 

We have a list of units, these units should be doing the bulk of the work.  Our index is comprised of 21 units, not including Forge World.  Of these units only 7 really see play.  Of those 7, 3 only make it because of list building constraints.  That means of our entire codex, only about 4 units are contributing in a meaningful way.  That is a big problem.  Our units are clearly not the stars of the codex.

 

Instead, we have Acts of Faith.  A crummy mechanic that makes these 4 units work twice as hard, while also potentially handing our army 1.5 turns on turn 1, before the opponent can do anything.  Flip the table around and think about it from the other side of the table.  You buffered your lines, you tried to do the best you can in the alternating deployment, but your opponent only showed MSU of Battle Sisters, some HQs with reroll auras, and a castle unit of infantry that can peck at your army from just about anywhere.  He's yet to drop the actual threats, those Repressors and Seraphim.  You've been strung out and forced to put your key units in a place where you think they are safe, deep in your deployment zone, and your opponent takes a few seconds to mentally draw some lines, and down come his real threats.  He wins turn 1, because well, you suck at rolling to go first (we all do, don't we? ).  His army rushes up a solid 24 inches, completely taking you by surprise and striking everything you thought you had buried deep enough.  Big tanks carrying 5 meltaguns, double moving jump pack troops, and a daemon prince (I mean... Celestine!) with disposable wounds strapped to her all are standing at your deployment line, ready to light you up.  Those Heavy Bolters didn't feel too bad, that shot before the game even really began, but now they fire again to punch that hole in your chaff line, allowing those high powered quick-moving troops EASY access to key pieces of your army.  It is a nightmare scenario, and it is going to shut down the game.  You're not sure how it happened, or how you're supposed to defend against it or protect your army.  You are sure that the game ended before you even got to take up your first turn.

 

This may be the exception to the rule, but it is very common against Index Sororitas.  Extra actions to position and cut out key parts of the opposing army are what we are living on, because it is clearly NOT our units and/or stratagems.  But at the core of what we're doing to our opponents, it leaves them feeling very apprehensive of the mechanic, and of the army.  This is the definition of a NPE.  Your opponent lost the match in such a gruesome way that they are left feeling very bitter about it.  This is what design wants to remove not just from our army, but from ALL armies.

 

All of that is before we even introduce stratagems.  Vessels of the Emperor's Will in a castle of Exorcists and Retributors WITH current Acts of Faith?  Come on guys, that is beyond overpowered.  Let me shoot 3 Exorcists and 2 squads of HB Rets, taking out at least a heavy tank and probably a chaff line... and then we'll do it again in the shooting phase.  5 units totaling about 600 points just leveled 20%-25% of a 2000 point army.  Never mind the Seraphim and Dominions that'll surely be adding to the carnage in short order.

 

This is where I say that while they are saddled with the current incarnation of Acts of Faith, they cannot possibly give us meaningful rules to build out the character of our army with that 1 singular rule taking every addition to overpowering levels.  Those rules are NOT healthy for our Army.  They do not allow the developers room to make our army fun and interesting, and full of character.  Instead they have to plan around a crutch that is holding up a list of fairly unexciting units.

 

I charge everyone with the following: instead of condemning the new rules within 24 hours of them being released... how about we honestly strive to figure out how we can make them better.  What makes the acts bad on their own merits (not compared to crummy rules that was allowing a bad army to punch WAY above their weight), and what can be done to make them better... for BOTH players.  We want rules that CHALLENGES other players, not steamrolls them into the floor.  The new system is healthier for our army, but that's not to say it is good in its current incarnation.  What needs to be changed to make that better in the spirit of competition?  Does the rule hold up in ALL 3 versions of play?  We all think that the developers only care about open play or narrative play or matched, or even competitive play... but they care about ALL of those types of play.  So the rules have to hold in all of those situations, another place where the current Acts of Faith really start to fail the spirit of the game.

 

Currently, I think there is WAY too many things to deal with morale.  I think that too much of our design space has gone to mitigating a mechanic that is hardly present in the game.  This is made worse by our biggest squad being our troops, and they can only go to 15 max... and there's little incentive elsewhere to go to that number, so we all default to MSU.

 

I also think that the current Acts of Faith may be a little undertuned.  I think these can be improved substantially.  The extra movement stratagem could allow the army to advance and still fire weapons as though they had not advanced at all (assault weapons firing at normal BS, heavy weapons still can fire at -1).  The extra shooting stratagem could allow a unit to add 1 shot to the profile of all of their weapons.  The fighting one is just fine... so is the healing one.  The psychic one is okay, but maybe drop it to a 3+ to shrug off mortals.  And the morale one is just fine.  These are kinda unique, a bit more powerful, and still makes opponents have to consider Acts of Faith, and makes it exciting to play them (yes, the shooting would allow for 2d6 Flamer hits each, neat, huh?! edit: don't think they are Assault 1, hitting d6 times, I think they are Assault d6, which would be d6+1 as suggested, my mistake mates!).  I'm not saying that they're perfect or even balanced, they just sprung up in my head on how I would try to make them more exciting since they've been greeted with so much vitriol.  But howling into the wind doesn't do anyone any good.  Let's steer towards being more constructive instead of "the world is doom!" and "my army will continue to collect dust, gg gw."

 

I'm sorry this post is ranty and long, but I think we need to refocus our efforts and unshackle ourselves from the past.  Embrace what we have and feedback on how we can make it better for the WHOLE community... even those filthy heretics.

 

Thanks for reading!

[bkde]

Excited for the Argeant Shroud rules as that's how my ladies are painted. Regardless, it looks like it'll be back to the drawing board and trying to figure out what'll make the girls work again.

 

Maybe it's optimism, but after the Ork codex I can't see GW so brutally missing the mark on the girls...particularly as it was only a few minor issues (celestians, exorcists, penitent) that needed fixing...but maybe I'm just viewing the glass half full...

 

Edited after viewing the above post:

Disagree with AoF being broken. First turn AoF's are all movement based, Ynnari, Blood Angels, Thousand Sons (Tzangor Dark matter bomb), Tyranids, Grey Knights can all accomplish similar crazy feats of movement. I've seen the AoF phase referred to as "cheat phase" multiple times on this forum.

 

AoF's are not unbeatable. That type of language comes from someone who is unfamiliar wirh the Sister's army and thereby seeks to blame their opponent's army for their own tactical blunders. At the end of the day we're still guardsmen in power armour. Learn the threat ranges.

 

Regarding the lack of diversity in the codex...so many units in the sisters book lack a specified function or suffer from a poor balancing to enable them to do hat they are meant to.

 

Celestians - current points they're just more expensive battle sisters, no role

Dialogus - +1 leadership? This unit is just garbage

Penitent - too slow/not enough defense to make it up the field

Exorcist - random shots and random damage struggles against high wound targets it wants to be shooting

 

Celestine, canonness, BSS, doms, seraphim, immos, repressor, make it into all of my lists, because all of them are great.

 

Simalcrum I don't buy into the extra faith, but she still has a purpose in some lists. Rets I use to run but they just don't fit my current list. Rhinos have a purpose, the immo is just so much better in my opinion.

 

Talking about negative play experiences, try playing double spear ynnari while they quicken across the board to ruin whatever they touch, then blast away out of LOS. But even that isn't unbeatable, you just have to know what it can do and plan for it. I'd be curious to know how much of the whining about AoF's comes from people who simply aren't familiar with playing against them.

[Drider]

Castles made of stars and seraphim spaghetti.

[Warsmith Aznable]

Let me try to hit this a bit more eloquently, after having a bit more time to prose my thoughts:

 

A little background into actually making games. First and foremost is it has to be fun, for all players. There are certain combinations the pop up that create "negative play experiences" (NPEs), these are the natural enemy of the designers. Designers are undoubtedly more concerned with aspects of their product that create these NPEs than they are at making things 100% fair and balanced. Heck, Chess has been around for hundreds of years and it is still unbalanced, the first player has a slight advantage throughout the game because he's always .5 turns ahead, and that is a strategic disadvantage that the second player is forced to overcome. But balancing first turn wasn't something the designers spent years trying to overcome, so long as the product on the table was enjoyable. Now that is one very MINOR aspect of a much less complicated game, but 40K has way more moving targets to try to control than chess does. Look at how they handled things like deep strike, spam tyrants lists, Ynnari (though they're still trying to fix the last one, there). Deep strike created scenarios where a player would be done before their first turn began. Flyrants came with the perfect blend of speed, protection (deep strike), firepower, and defense that made playing against them very not exciting... especially if they could get the drop on you. Grey Knights and Blood Angels dropping 75% of their points from deep strike reserve, leaving only slivers of the army that they didn't care about on the field in case they didn't go first gave them an immense advantage against players who couldn't... guaranteeing these lists had alpha strike privileges. Psyker spam leveling armies with indefensible smites, characters shielding characters and forcing firepower into 1 specific model instead of being able to delegate threats normally with shooting. Friggen rhino bunkers cheesing the word "visible" as they pivoted around to block LoS to other units while allowing a powerful shooting unit to snipe characters with impunity. These all create NPEs, and these have all been remedied in short order by GW. The actual balance isn't too far off in the game, and even when facing a more powerful army, so long as they haven't been leveraging some of the "cheesier" tactics that have no defense against them, the game is still not a terrible experience. Even now they're trying to eliminate sudden death to get firepower-loaded armies another disadvantage to make them shift to armies able to punch and move/control. That's a very long explanation of a very simple prospect of design, but it is important to understand them, because it is at the root of the problem I want to describe.

 

I'm going to be very blunt here to start things off for my thoughts on the codex, but it is the most important statement I can make: Acts of Faith as they exist are broken. They create NPEs which damage the brand and ultimately damage our army.

 

We have a list of units, these units should be doing the bulk of the work. Our index is comprised of 21 units, not including Forge World. Of these units only 7 really see play. Of those 7, 3 only make it because of list building constraints. That means of our entire codex, only about 4 units are contributing in a meaningful way. That is a big problem. Our units are clearly not the stars of the codex.

 

Instead, we have Acts of Faith. A crummy mechanic that makes these 4 units work twice as hard, while also potentially handing our army 1.5 turns on turn 1, before the opponent can do anything. Flip the table around and think about it from the other side of the table. You buffered your lines, you tried to do the best you can in the alternating deployment, but your opponent only showed MSU of Battle Sisters, some HQs with reroll auras, and a castle unit of infantry that can peck at your army from just about anywhere. He's yet to drop the actual threats, those Repressors and Seraphim. You've been strung out and forced to put your key units in a place where you think they are safe, deep in your deployment zone, and your opponent takes a few seconds to mentally draw some lines, and down come his real threats. He wins turn 1, because well, you suck at rolling to go first (we all do, don't we? ). His army rushes up a solid 24 inches, completely taking you by surprise and striking everything you thought you had buried deep enough. Big tanks carrying 5 meltaguns, double moving jump pack troops, and a daemon prince (I mean... Celestine!) with disposable wounds strapped to her all are standing at your deployment line, ready to light you up. Those Heavy Bolters didn't feel too bad, that shot before the game even really began, but now they fire again to punch that hole in your chaff line, allowing those high powered quick-moving troops EASY access to key pieces of your army. It is a nightmare scenario, and it is going to shut down the game. You're not sure how it happened, or how you're supposed to defend against it or protect your army. You are sure that the game ended before you even got to take up your first turn.

 

This may be the exception to the rule, but it is very common against Index Sororitas. Extra actions to position and cut out key parts of the opposing army are what we are living on, because it is clearly NOT our units and/or stratagems. But at the core of what we're doing to our opponents, it leaves them feeling very apprehensive of the mechanic, and of the army. This is the definition of a NPE. Your opponent lost the match in such a gruesome way that they are left feeling very bitter about it. This is what design wants to remove not just from our army, but from ALL armies.

 

All of that is before we even introduce stratagems. Vessels of the Emperor's Will in a castle of Exorcists and Retributors WITH current Acts of Faith? Come on guys, that is beyond overpowered. Let me shoot 3 Exorcists and 2 squads of HB Rets, taking out at least a heavy tank and probably a chaff line... and then we'll do it again in the shooting phase. 5 units totaling about 600 points just leveled 20%-25% of a 2000 point army. Never mind the Seraphim and Dominions that'll surely be adding to the carnage in short order.

 

This is where I say that while they are saddled with the current incarnation of Acts of Faith, they cannot possibly give us meaningful rules to build out the character of our army with that 1 singular rule taking every addition to overpowering levels. Those rules are NOT healthy for our Army. They do not allow the developers room to make our army fun and interesting, and full of character. Instead they have to plan around a crutch that is holding up a list of fairly unexciting units.

 

I charge everyone with the following: instead of condemning the new rules within 24 hours of them being released... how about we honestly strive to figure out how we can make them better. What makes the acts bad on their own merits (not compared to crummy rules that was allowing a bad army to punch WAY above their weight), and what can be done to make them better... for BOTH players. We want rules that CHALLENGES other players, not steamrolls them into the floor. The new system is healthier for our army, but that's not to say it is good in its current incarnation. What needs to be changed to make that better in the spirit of competition? Does the rule hold up in ALL 3 versions of play? We all think that the developers only care about open play or narrative play or matched, or even competitive play... but they care about ALL of those types of play. So the rules have to hold in all of those situations, another place where the current Acts of Faith really start to fail the spirit of the game.

 

Currently, I think there is WAY too many things to deal with morale. I think that too much of our design space has gone to mitigating a mechanic that is hardly present in the game. This is made worse by our biggest squad being our troops, and they can only go to 15 max... and there's little incentive elsewhere to go to that number, so we all default to MSU.

 

I also think that the current Acts of Faith may be a little undertuned. I think these can be improved substantially. The extra movement stratagem could allow the army to advance and still fire weapons as though they had not advanced at all (assault weapons firing at normal BS, heavy weapons still can fire at -1). The extra shooting stratagem could allow a unit to add 1 shot to the profile of all of their weapons. The fighting one is just fine... so is the healing one. The psychic one is okay, but maybe drop it to a 3+ to shrug off mortals. And the morale one is just fine. These are kinda unique, a bit more powerful, and still makes opponents have to consider Acts of Faith, and makes it exciting to play them (yes, the shooting would allow for 2d6 Flamer hits each, neat, huh?! edit: don't think they are Assault 1, hitting d6 times, I think they are Assault d6, which would be d6+1 as suggested, my mistake mates!). I'm not saying that they're perfect or even balanced, they just sprung up in my head on how I would try to make them more exciting since they've been greeted with so much vitriol. But howling into the wind doesn't do anyone any good. Let's steer towards being more constructive instead of "the world is doom!" and "my army will continue to collect dust, gg gw."

 

I'm sorry this post is ranty and long, but I think we need to refocus our efforts and unshackle ourselves from the past. Embrace what we have and feedback on how we can make it better for the WHOLE community... even those filthy heretics.

 

Thanks for reading!

Am I just a bad SoB player? I had no idea everyone else was beat all of their opponents on Turn 1 and winning games before their opponents even got to go. Normally I rush up the field, clear some chaff, then get assaulted by multi-wound elites with several ways to get re-rolls and stacked invuln and FNP saves who march through my army like a hot knife through butter while I desperately try to grab objectives before the end of the game. Never mind all the time I've spent in the psychic phase doing nothing but remove models.

[ERJAK]

To Purifying tempest: I don't necessarily agree in general with your opinion on the old AoFs, but I DO agree that they mostly served to bump our very few serviceable units up towards good. I also agree that existing as they were couldn't continue if we are to get more useful models. Not that we are, but if we do they would be too much.

 

Condemning them is a part of the repair process. We need to make it absolutely clear to anyone following the discussion that these rules aren't something we are pleased with. (Even if you don't HATE them, can you honestly say they make you happy? I'm dreading even doing playest games). The initial emotional response is a useful gauge, especially considering that almost every other codex has been met with mostly optimism. This is the first Codex since GK I can honestly say isn't getting at least a semi-positive reception. Orkz had dozens of theoryhammer lists for their book at this point. I keep trying to find ANY combo that isn't worse than what other armies can bring cheaper. It's very hard.

 

Figuring out how to fix them comes after figuring out everything that's wrong with them and that means identifying flaws without sugar coating. A little bit of anger/frustration/disbelief at this stage is fine, so long as it's edited out before actual official feedback emails, it's fine.

 

As for figuring out what's how to make them better, I am doing that right now also. I already have a 10 page google doc of theoryhammer I'm working on that I plan to supplement with practice games before I send any of it.

 

I agree 100% about morale. We weren't struggling with it before, they didn't do anything to make large squads better (large numbers of small squads are still more useful), that many rules for it is silly. Just the AoF would be fine.

 

The acts of faith system as it exists is actually really really good. Vessels is extremely well designed, the faith point system is well done, the stratagem combos are solid. The problem with the system is 100% in that the acts of faith are far too weak. The system is built as if the abilities will be impactful, powerful bonuses used and they just aren't. They also severely overestimate the power of the units that are benefiting from them.

 

Compare what goes into getting Vessels +1 to hit off on a large number of units (6" from a character, 3+ roll at best unless you buy a 30pts character, have to take mediocre/subpar units like HB rets and Exorcists to get a lot of value out of it, 3CP) to just...Kayvan Shrike. Shrike gives a far better bonus than all our massive setup options. The current AoFs are bad enough that you could take out the die roll and the once per turn limit and the system would just be 'okay'.

 

 

I like your suggestions. I think some need to go a bit further, though. You'd need +3 to move AND run and shoot because they're already pretty close to the same thing. +1 shot with flamers getting an extra D6 shots would be right around correct.

 

Fighting needs to be easier to get off due to how little you can do to buff a Character's AoF roll. Other than that it's good. The resurection one is fine. Morale is bad, but it's useful often enough that if the other ones are powerful enough, having it in your back pocket would be fine.

 

Being doom and gloom here and now is Fine. This is just an internet forum, EVERYTHING you say here is just howling into the wind. It's the actual feedback emails that GW recieves where you need totally logical, totally unemotional speech.

 

Once we all get the book we can turn towards focusing on improving the rules, but we don't suddenly have to pretend like everything is sunshine and rainbows. Be angry, be upset, be dissappointed, be incredulous (if those are how you feel. If you're mildly dissappointed or slightly underwhelmed or even neutral or somewhat positive, those are fine to.) So long as you do it in places like this and you aren't throwing the baby out with the bathwater on anything, and are honestly doing the best you can to help improve the rules, it's a perfectly reasonable reaction.

[A.T.]

The acts of faith system as it exists is actually really really good. Vessels is extremely well designed, the faith point system is well done, the stratagem combos are solid. The problem with the system is 100% in that the acts of faith are far too weak.

It's a risky change to make them stronger with the current system though. The army is already going to be hugely swingy in power and the stronger you make them the more lists are going to end up being built around 'how can I reduce the risk'

[dracpanzer]

I'm looking to get a full list of points, then figure out where my current army is as a total. Then decide what I want to throw into it at 2k and start throwing them at whatever I can come up against just to see how an army not optimized to get tons of Faith Points does at this level. The Beta upgraded the PenEngine and Repentia and I will try to get them on the table and see how they do. I for one never really stopped playing them in Index lists, so maybe that will help as I try them in larger numbers.

 

As it stands AoF is nothing I want to rely on. I would like to see them remove the need to roll to pass an AoF. Half the army is currently designed to make that easier, the other to mitigate morale losses, so I don't see that happening. Instead, just allow more than one unit to use the same AoF a turn but limit each unit to only using one a turn.

 

Honestly though, I'm more disappointed in the lack of any attempt to fix Celestians and our non Celestian HQ problem. Repentia seem quite a bit better, PenEngines moreso, but the R03 still gimps our HQ choices pretty hard and Celestians are still just as lost as they have always been.

[A.T.]

His army rushes up a solid 24 inches, completely taking you by surprise and striking everything you thought you had buried deep enough.

The classic advantage of playing sisters - surprising players who aren't familiar with them.

[Commander Dawnstar]

I know it's a pipe dream, but I really wish GW had given us a more complete image of where the faction is headed in this Beta Codex. I'm sure people still wouldn't be happy with the changes to Acts of Faith but it would be so much easier to put them in context if we could see where we might be gaining power. Instead we're left with a situation where our main point of criticism will presumably be a system that might well be deliberately undertuned in order to accommodate other as of yet unrevealed changes and additions. It's just frustrating.

[CrusherJoe]

 

[WHACK-A-MUNCH]

 

The AoF system as a whole is the second worst part of the codex. If they hadn't of botched that so badly, we'd be more or less okay. If they had left the same abilities as before, we'd be cherry. If they had given something a little bit more substantial(even reroll to hit instead of +1 and +6 move instead of +3) it would still be solid. As it stands...I can't see even kill teams getting much mileage out of it. Let alone an entire SoB army.

 

The worst thing was what they did to Celestine and the Gemini.

 

 

You speak the truth, plain and simple.

 

I find it highly entertaining that one person (who may or may not be from this forum) has added to my FB comment on the 40K page. Lots of people talking, nobody taking action. I weep for the future of our army if this is the response we can expect to GW. The only way change will take place is if our voices are heard -- preferably in a public forum, where our responses may or may not be read, and probably won't be replied to. I'm not suggesting or condoning being rude or obnoxious, but being professional and reasonable -- and consistent. 

 

...and if it's not on "my" comment, I don't care. Someone else start one if that's what everyone would prefer. So long as we present a unified front, I don't care where it is. It should be sooner rather than later, though, I think.

[ERJAK]

 

The acts of faith system as it exists is actually really really good. Vessels is extremely well designed, the faith point system is well done, the stratagem combos are solid. The problem with the system is 100% in that the acts of faith are far too weak.

It's a risky change to make them stronger with the current system though. The army is already going to be hugely swingy in power and the stronger you make them the more lists are going to end up being built around 'how can I reduce the risk'

It really isn't a risky challenge. Right now they're laregly irrelevant.

 

We AREN'T hugely swingy in power because the difference in succeeding an act of faith and failing one is next to nothing.

 

Even landing our best AoF onto our entire army with a THREE CP stratagem isn't as good of a bonus as space marines get from their chapter masters and is only slightly better than a Canonesses reroll aura, despite being not at all guaranteed, incredibly expensive, and requiring a lot of setup.

 

EVERY list is built around 'how do I reduce the risk of failure'? If acts of Faith get good, you can assume most people will be investing in making them more reliable. That's just good army doctrine, and is a GOOD THING. Because you do INVEST in them to make them better.

 

THE PROBLEM we have right now is that the most efficient way to reduce the chance of failure for AoFs is to just...not bother with them. The bonuses are so meager that it's impossible to justify investing in them at all.

 

Why would you bother with Vessels of the Emperor as it is now? It's not even as good as a Space marine chapter master's reroll aura and costs 3 CP PER TURN.

 

I forgot my summation: Basically, we can gain A LOT of power in this system before it becomes a possible balance issue.

[Purifying Tempest]

I've tinkered with a list just to put something up to be thought of... just to get the brain juices working and I came REALLY close to making a Brigade without trying.  It was odd.  The list probably is no good, but just as a rough draft it looks... okay, at best.  It is still over by about 45 points, so it would need to be trimmed to make it into a typical 2000 point game.  Mostly just a working draft since it all has to be done by hand for the model and wargear costs.

 

HQ:

 

Canoness with Comb-melta and Blade of Admonition

Celestine

Missionary

 

Troops:

 

4x 5 BSS with 3 Stormbolters

2x 15 BSS with Combi-melta, Meltagun, and Heavy Flamer

 

Elites:

 

8 Repentia

Mistress of Repentance

5 Celestians with Stormbolters

 

Fast Attack:

 

2x 5 Dominions with 4 Meltaguns, Combi-melta

10 Seraphim all with double bolt pistols

 

Heavy Support:

 

5 Retributors with 4 Heavy Bolters

2x Exorcists

 

1 Rhino with extra Stormbolter

3 Immolation Flamer Immolators

 

Should be about 90 models with Acts of Faith, so +9 Faith Points.  Gives 2 squads with the ability to play Holy Trinity on anyone brazen enough to come within striking distance, and the squad sizes should make it matter.  Canoness with the Blade piles into an Immolator with the 5 Celestians.  2 Dominions up to our old tricks, only Immolators instead of Repressors.  Seraphim set up in deep strike with a bunch of bolt pistols to leverage Burning Descent and plop themselves to either snipe an objective, or remove an opponent from one.  Rhino packed with Repentia, Mistress, and Missionary.  And a minimal backfield castle of the Retributors and 2 Exorcists to lay down some heavier fire.

 

There's a good coverage of options to make use of just about all the stratagems, and should be decent for getting into the Acts of Faith as well.  I'll probably try it out next weekend, with any luck... after trimming those last few points to get it usable.

[Beams]

Honestly, I think the big power faction is OoBR.

 

I think Cannonesses, Repentia and Pengines will be best, but still suffer from super glass cannon. I'm going to try and come up with a basic list using them, and then vreate a simulation to see just how good the Repentia will be, since I imagine they will have a ≈25% chance to kill anything they touch.

I've tinkered with a list just to put something up to be thought of... just to get the brain juices working and I came REALLY close to making a Brigade without trying.  It was odd.  The list probably is no good, but just as a rough draft it looks... okay, at best.  It is still over by about 45 points, so it would need to be trimmed to make it into a typical 2000 point game.  Mostly just a working draft since it all has to be done by hand for the model and wargear costs.

 

HQ:

 

Canoness with Comb-melta and Blade of Admonition

Celestine

Missionary

 

Troops:

 

4x 5 BSS with 3 Stormbolters

2x 15 BSS with Combi-melta, Meltagun, and Heavy Flamer

 

Elites:

 

8 Repentia

Mistress of Repentance

5 Celestians with Stormbolters

 

Fast Attack:

 

2x 5 Dominions with 4 Meltaguns, Combi-melta

10 Seraphim all with double bolt pistols

 

Heavy Support:

 

5 Retributors with 4 Heavy Bolters

2x Exorcists

 

1 Rhino with extra Stormbolter

3 Immolation Flamer Immolators

 

Should be about 90 models with Acts of Faith, so +9 Faith Points.  Gives 2 squads with the ability to play Holy Trinity on anyone brazen enough to come within striking distance, and the squad sizes should make it matter.  Canoness with the Blade piles into an Immolator with the 5 Celestians.  2 Dominions up to our old tricks, only Immolators instead of Repressors.  Seraphim set up in deep strike with a bunch of bolt pistols to leverage Burning Descent and plop themselves to either snipe an objective, or remove an opponent from one.  Rhino packed with Repentia, Mistress, and Missionary.  And a minimal backfield castle of the Retributors and 2 Exorcists to lay down some heavier fire.

 

There's a good coverage of options to make use of just about all the stratagems, and should be decent for getting into the Acts of Faith as well.  I'll probably try it out next weekend, with any luck... after trimming those last few points to get it usable.

Unless they change something, only 3 Celestians can take stormbolters.

[Purifying Tempest]

The Celestians only have 3 Stormbolters, poor clarity on my part of the typing there.  They're basically disposable wounds for the Canoness with the Blade... they can also Blessed Bolts if the opportunity arises.

[Atrus]

Nuisance of a driving job, cant post things and when you can, others have already said what you have to say.

 

The more i think about the AoF system in terms of generation and mechanics; the more i find that i dont mind it. Its alright and scales okay if you dont intend to spam faith. In and of itself, it is fine.

It just falls on its face when it comes to the faith abilities themselves. Yes, coming from what we had it is particularly jarring, like someone offering you a caramello and finding out its vegemite when you bite in. Theyre just in need of nudging up to be worth thinking about.

I like some of the suggestions put forth such as the +3 move also allowing advance and still shoot- how many armies have that for their whole army? Its fine to give sisyers the chance to have a single unit do it once a turn (vessels at its cost now is hardly worth 3 cp and isnt going to get used a lot at that cost anyways.).

Maybe the +1bs can also ignore cover? Or go more old school where the WH one resolved to wound rolls of 6 at ap1, resolve it at ap-4 or at an improved ap value by 1 or 2?

Morale one is fine for the occasional blob squad, situational but potentially saves us 2 cp.

Same goes for the healing.

 

The ground work for faith abilities are there, it just needs nudging up.

 

Undeniable though that flamers need more love in an army that is hot for flames. Heck even just giving sisters flamers a rule that they ignore the benefits of cover would be good. Mean, look at the new flamer models, they look great, why not give them some rule love or at least some stratagem love?

[ERJAK]

For both Beams and Purifying, remember that we don't know 100% for sure that missionaries and Pen Engines don't break CTs. They don't break the detachment for soup purposes but they might require their own separate Spearhead or w/e to not lose <Orders>.

 

Purifying, that looks like a good list to get a general test of the usability of a bunch of things at once. I'm planning on focusing most of my testing around how Mech lists function because I feel that most people here tend to favor infantry more than I do already.

 

This isn't really relevant to anyone else but I can tell you all the units I've largely written off based on running them through every theoryhammer scenario I can think of that I will be following you guys to see if they're worth doing more in depth tests on:

 

The Geminae: Arguably the worst unit in the entire game. I cannot see ANY scenario in which they don't need a full rework.

 

Seraphim: They function like Chaos Raptors or Blood Angels Assault Marines now but quite a bit worse because they basically can't deepstrike(basically). There is room for them to be strong if taking advantage of their easy 3++...but do we really WANT that to be good? Using them with Celestine seems like it has potential, but ultimately with neither unit being particularly kill-y in it's own right...I can't really see that being all that strong. If you consider that under some interpretations of the old reroll ability Seraphim had a better Invul with Celestine than they do now anyway...super meh.

 

Celestians: Still just worse battle sisters. The wound bounce is irrelevant and with the passion being as difficult to use as it is...meh. If you could use Vessels of the Emperor on units, a setup with 3 units of celestians in rhinos with Simulacra and buff characters might have been a decently strong melee blob...but not so much when the best you can get the roll for The Passion to is a 4++rerolling.

 

Repentia: I know, I know. I'm sorry. They just don't seem like they have enough going for them to be better than Arcoflaggellants, although they are certainly better than deathcults now. The passion is too inconsistent to be relied on and repentia really need OoBR to be worthwhile. You could take an Ebon Chalice Mistress and Vessels her, but then you'd need to run multiple units and find a way for them to be within 6" of her AND at least 12" of each other after charges. Arco Flaggelants just seem better, even with all the stuff repentia have going for them.

 

Deathcults: Just worse Repentia now.

[Atrus]

I feel repentia and arcos are counters to 2 different kinda of targets.

 

Its pretty obvious; arcos = anti chaff. Repentia = anti bignasty.

[CrusherJoe]

I'm sorry, I thought I remembered you saying something about how you had compiled the various leak / beta codex previews... I might be mistaking you for someone else. :/  I was hoping to compare what other people have gleaned from around the internets.  I've read a number of things, some of which contradict with each other directly, and have been trying to get them straight.

 

I am planning on picking up CA straight from the store next Saturday, but was hoping to get a clearer idea of what to expect, rather than notes thrown out into the interwebs by folks who by and large don't know sisters so well.

 

That was me -- check your PM. :)

[CrusherJoe]

Let me try to hit this a bit more eloquently, after having a bit more time to prose my thoughts:

 

[well thought out and well written essay on game design/balance]

 

I'm sorry this post is ranty and long, but I think we need to refocus our efforts and unshackle ourselves from the past.  Embrace what we have and feedback on how we can make it better for the WHOLE community... even those filthy heretics.

 

Thanks for reading!

 

I appreciate your thoughts and the obvious effort you put in to expressing them -- well done.

 

However, I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with you.

 

In fact, every case you describe as to where things had to be "toned down" I have but two counter-arguments for you:

 

Codex: Orks and Ynarri Soulburst

 

If you think the corner-case of an Exorcist firing twice is OP...I can't wait until you look across the table and see 20+ Mobbed-Up Lootas and experience the joy of them shooting twice for the low, low price of a strat. Or how about a max-sized unit of Dark Reapers shooting twice with the help of a psychic power (Word of the Phoenix) cast far outside of deny range -- followed by the Fire & Fade strat denying you LOS to those Reapers in your turn. Trust me the flat 3 damage from those things add up quick.

 

What about double moving? Sure Celestine moving 24" seems excessive until you see how far a full-size unit of Shining Spears (with all the trimmings and other psychic buffs!) can move. Oh, wait, they can actually move three times: 

 

1x Regular move 1x Quicken 1x Word/Soulburst for a whopping 48 inches of movement.

 

(...so please forgive me if I find the concept of Celestine moving twice to not only be not OP, but sometimes barely adequate for the things we need/depend on her for)

 

The Soulburst mechanic has been beyond broken since it's introduction in Gathering Storm. GW has has ample opportunity to fix/replace/remove it and yet...here we are, almost 2 years after it was inflicted on 40K, and it remains -- still broken, still present, still abused, and still dominating the top tables at events worldwide. <salty>Where's the replacement for Soulburst, GW? I'm still waiting!</salty>

 

I would love to believe what you say about design and balance were in the forefront of GW's writers, but there's too much evidence to the contrary. Have you read Codex: Orks? Better yet, have you played against it? If you haven't, you really should. It'll give you a fresh new perspective on how looney-tunes-crazy-go-nuts-off-the-rails GW's "designers" are with regards to certain factions/armies/rules. Codex: Orks is an abomination and seeing how "good" it is -- much less Drukhari (remember them?) -- only makes the...travesty...that is the beta codex all the more a hard slap in the face to Sisters fans and players -- some of us whom have been waiting for a decent Sisters codex since Third Edition. For all they hyped it up (and they did!) I was expecting something a wee bit more satisfying than Index Sisters 2: Ruined Celestine and Nerfed Acts of Faith Edition. It's disappointing, frustrating, and -- in some ways -- insulting. I'm really tired of watching The Disappointment Channel in regards to my favorite, first-love army.

 

Having said all that, I actually like the Acts of Faith mechanic. It reminds me of the Codex: Witch Hunters mechanics. Now if only the Acts themselves weren't gimped and out of tune and out of touch with how a Sisters army really works and plays we'd be in business.

[ERJAK]

I feel repentia and arcos are counters to 2 different kinda of targets.

 

Its pretty obvious; arcos = anti chaff. Repentia = anti bignasty.

With Arcos getting -1 rend and an arguably better stratagem, I wouldn't be surprised if they end up being better all around. They probably fall down compared to repentia against T6-T8, but I'd have to do the calcs to find out. I do think that fragile melee units tend to have more luck targeting medium value targets rather than the big nasties. 

 

That said, I don't think either of them will be particularly exceptional.

[CaptainMarsh]

 

 

[WHACK-A-MUNCH]

 

The AoF system as a whole is the second worst part of the codex. If they hadn't of botched that so badly, we'd be more or less okay. If they had left the same abilities as before, we'd be cherry. If they had given something a little bit more substantial(even reroll to hit instead of +1 and +6 move instead of +3) it would still be solid. As it stands...I can't see even kill teams getting much mileage out of it. Let alone an entire SoB army.

 

The worst thing was what they did to Celestine and the Gemini.

 

 

You speak the truth, plain and simple.

 

I find it highly entertaining that one person (who may or may not be from this forum) has added to my FB comment on the 40K page. Lots of people talking, nobody taking action. I weep for the future of our army if this is the response we can expect to GW. The only way change will take place is if our voices are heard -- preferably in a public forum, where our responses may or may not be read, and probably won't be replied to. I'm not suggesting or condoning being rude or obnoxious, but being professional and reasonable -- and consistent. 

 

...and if it's not on "my" comment, I don't care. Someone else start one if that's what everyone would prefer. So long as we present a unified front, I don't care where it is. It should be sooner rather than later, though, I think.

 

They have a feedback email. That is where they have said they want feedback. Chaining onto your comment is, sorry, not what is required. If people wanna do it then fine, that can't hurt. But they want feedback from the beta codex to go to their feedback email. 

[ERJAK]

 

 

 

[WHACK-A-MUNCH]

 

The AoF system as a whole is the second worst part of the codex. If they hadn't of botched that so badly, we'd be more or less okay. If they had left the same abilities as before, we'd be cherry. If they had given something a little bit more substantial(even reroll to hit instead of +1 and +6 move instead of +3) it would still be solid. As it stands...I can't see even kill teams getting much mileage out of it. Let alone an entire SoB army.

 

The worst thing was what they did to Celestine and the Gemini.

 

 

You speak the truth, plain and simple.

 

I find it highly entertaining that one person (who may or may not be from this forum) has added to my FB comment on the 40K page. Lots of people talking, nobody taking action. I weep for the future of our army if this is the response we can expect to GW. The only way change will take place is if our voices are heard -- preferably in a public forum, where our responses may or may not be read, and probably won't be replied to. I'm not suggesting or condoning being rude or obnoxious, but being professional and reasonable -- and consistent. 

 

...and if it's not on "my" comment, I don't care. Someone else start one if that's what everyone would prefer. So long as we present a unified front, I don't care where it is. It should be sooner rather than later, though, I think.

 

They have a feedback email. That is where they have said they want feedback. Chaining onto your comment is, sorry, not what is required. If people wanna do it then fine, that can't hurt. But they want feedback from the beta codex to go to their feedback email. 

 

They also likely want something that has clearly had a lot of thought and work put into it. I've probably spent 3-4 hours on just the theoryhammer behind the Celestine nerfs being too harsh and why the AoF system is less than stellar. I have another 2-3 hours before I'm comfortable with just my feedback on Celestine and AoFs. Another hour of editing and formatting after that and it should be ready to submit, AFTER I get a few games in to really see if I missed anything. I'm hoping that AoFs and Celestine can be fixed in the CA FAQ if we focus down on them hard enough(though I don't expect it).

 

Actual unit reviews will require several playtest games and another few hours of mathhammer/theoryhammer on top of all the writing, editing, formatting. Breaking up feedback into digestible, concise chunks that still convey everything that needs to be conveyed is a big part of it too. No one is going to read a 50 page email, but if I can make 2-3 pages with enough good content to be readable, front loading the most important points into the first couple paragraphs, then that should have a much greater impact. Do that for everything in the army that needs to be addressed over a reasonable span, and again HOPEFULLY they'll see the issues and fix them.

 

My confidence is quite low that we'll be in a good place once the codex comes out, tbh. Grey Knights have been in a terrible place since the edition started and the most recent CA was a bandaid on a broken leg. Our one saving grace is that they should know by now that if the rules come out and they're not up to at least a reasonable level of strength(which these are most certainly not) then their sales will be hurting.

 

I can tell you that if the rules remain at this level I'll likely be spending half as much or less on new Sisters models than I have saved up for. In fact, I've also decided to stop making additional savings deposits because I can't see how I'll need more than the 1800 I already have saved when I only need a 'collector' amount of most of the units in the book, rather than the 'gamer' amount.

 

Edit: I also think that using proper names for abilities, like calling it 'Hand of the Emperor' rather than +3 movement will appeal to them.

[CrusherJoe]

Good stuff, y'all. I agree -- and I've always held that reasoned discourse is far better than emotional ranting. I apologize to everyone here, I'm afraid I've been more emotional than rational about this whole mess. 

 

I intend on doing a lot of playtesting, list crafting, and more playtesting -- both as a stand-alone army and as a soup ingredient. My initial thoughts are that this feels less like a full release (and we know it's isn't) and more like one of the old "get you by" things from WD years ago. It also feels like Sisters may not stand by themselves, but are better with other Imperial support. We'll see.