Codex: Sisters of Battle 2011

So, I finally got my hands on the second part of the Sisters of Battle White Dwarf codex.  I’ve been holding back from joining in the online discussion until I saw the points values and have all the info, and I have to say, I like it.

I realize that the response online from players has been mostly negative – at least from what I’ve seen – so let me share a few thoughts about why I’m glad GW did this.  I admit it’s partly because I’m a glass half-full kind of guy (and partly because I enjoy flouting received opinion), but that’s not the whole story.

As someone who’s actually been playing with Witch Hunters right up until this release (I played a 2750 pt. game just a little while back with a few of my Sisters in the mix), I’m glad they’ve been updated.  As I said here, I don’t think they really deserve a full codex, so I’m grateful to Games Workshop for actually giving us Witch Hunters players this update.

I personally think 5th edition 40k is the best edition so far in terms of elegance of design.  This is a bit like saying that a rock is better than a banana for slicing bread, but whatever. What I’m getting at is that playing with my old Witch Hunters in recent years has been fun but quaint.  They cost a bazillion points, have weird abilities that don’t gel with 5th edition, and all in all are either a dead loss or more effective than they’re meant to be due to some accident of edition-compatibility.  This update makes them fit with 5th edition *cough*35 point Rhinos*cough*.  And if there is another edition around the corner, my Sisters will now be on even footing with the other 5th ed. books when it comes.

Now the points.  I don’t understand people quibbling and bitching over tiny points discrepancies.  It puzzles me whenever I read someone’s opinion that “(insert troops) should be 2 points cheaper.”  Me and my regular opponents have proved on multiple occasions that points are not an exact science – they’re a rough indication.  The old Witch Hunters were, by modern standards, horribly overpriced.  Now they aren’t.  Even if you think they’re still a bit overpriced, it’s an improvement right?

Basically, I like my Sisters and I want to play games with them, and if having a monstrously outdated codex didn’t stop me, having a nice 5th edition one certainly won’t.  Also, Saint Celestine for 115 points!?  No-one seems to think this is even worth a mention.  Last game I used the old Saint (who costs 201 points), and she killed three combat squads of marines, and the new one is even better.  Dominions now have Scout and don’t have to take a transport.  Penitent engines can no longer be killed by bolters.  There’ll be a lot less looking up during games with the new faith system.  I actually really like Light of the Emperor, the multi-purpose faith power of the regular Battle Sisters.  One of my favourite things in the new Grey Knights book was the Inquisitorial henchmen squads.  I was really hoping they’d make an Ecclesiarchy version, and they did.  All of these things make me happy.

Some things are a bit sad of course.  Change is rarely painless.  My canoness can’t use a jump-pack any more but meh. That’s what the Saint is for.  Faith is different, and probably not as powerful, but I’ll gladly suffer that in return for 5th edition organization and points costs across the board.  Book of St Lucius is gone but I always felt like a cheat with that in 5th edition anyway . . .

So yeah, I’ve been reading talk about dumbing down, nerfing, etc, but really? 40k, at the scale people want to play it, should be simpler, not more complicated.  That’s why 5th edition is so great.  And now my Sisters have got with the program and I didn’t even have to buy a codex or any new models.

I can’t help feeling that a lot of the negativity towards this release comes not from Sisters players who will play the army no matter what, but from 40k experts and competitive players who are looking at the new rules in terms of the so-called meta-game.  When someone like that reads the St. Celestine rules (for example) they just see an average character whose points could probably be better spent elsewhere, on more MSUs or whatever.  I see my familiar flaming angel of the Emperor’s wrath, who is now better value than before.  So I’m happy.

I really can’t see how a dedicated Sisters player could be disappointed. Sure, things have changed, but that was always going to happen at some point wasn’t it?

35 responses to “Codex: Sisters of Battle 2011

  • Porky

    It’s refreshing to hear such a positive reaction with all the complaining going on, and you make a good point about who’s doing that complaining. The comment about the glass being half full seems very apt too, in that we’d expect any new list to be a fair mix – not too hot, not too cold – and that people would then vary in opinion based more on their perspective and nature, as ‘glass half empty’ or ‘half full’, as here.

  • Capn Stoogey

    Celestine is proof that even in a 2 part white dwarf codex, codex creep is alive and well! 😉

    I hate her so much…

  • drpieplate

    Nice to read a positive post for a change. Agree that points costing is not exact. for example take a IG Veteran add carapace and your at 10 pts, for BS 4, a 4+, and an s3 basic weapon, Battle Sister: 12pts for BS4, a 3+, and an s4 basic weapon. hmmm… overcosted? really?

  • Thor

    I’m not a Sisters player and have not paid any attention to the new codex but of course you can’t help but hear the rampant opinions about them. I agree about who is criticizing them and the problem is a lot of others will buy into it too. I can’t speak for the points needing to be tweaked but in my experience too many people judge things on a 1 to 1 basis. They’ll compare a Sister Squad to say a Tactical Squad or an IG Squad. What most fail to do is look at the sum of its parts because that’s really the only accurate gauge.

  • James S

    @Porky, thank you sir! You’re right, people’s characters will tend to change their reaction to something. Most 40k bloggers and commentators are a pretty gloomy bunch I reckon. There are exceptions, but many of them react to new releases with some variation of “it sucks because it’s bad” or “it sucks because it’s too good.” Either way, they’re saying it sucks.

  • James S

    @Capn Stoogey, just wait until our Apoc game. Actually screw it, maybe I’ll use the Saint in our next game, she’s only 115 points mwahahaha!

    Oh wait I can’t because there’s no allies any more 😦

    I don’t have enough pure Sisters because I used to run them with my Guard and Inquisition. Stupid new codex! 😀

  • James S

    @drpieplate, good point. When you put it like that it’s hard to see what people are complaining about. Especially when you look at Dominions and see they have all that plus Scout for 14 points.

  • James S

    @Thor that’s very true too. Looking at things in isolation is the curse of the over-analytical mind I think. People often lose sight of the forest for the trees when discussing points.

  • Peter Smith

    You have to look at the army as a whole – faith points now really not worth it. They were what kept sisters alive. Half the army simply is not worth the points.

    Bad – All Init 3 especially seraphim! Jumpback really good. Penitent engines. Faith points weak, and not staged to army points. Points cost not proportionate. Imm cannot move 12″ and fire its hvy flamer -no fire points. All init 3.

    Good – St C 115, Domions with scout. Few HQ’s with close combat squad with Storm shields

    The codex is poorly written – e.g repentia FNP and no armour! – for 6th?, commands squad max 5 characters, units of 5 celestines – buy 5 more and you don’t get any extra special weapons.

    To put it basically – SOB are short range firepower i.e bolters and flamers. They need either better firepower, better movement or better weapons to compensate for a game where everything can run, fleet, assault, out shoot. They were robbed. A codex written by someone who does not play them or understand them. The old codex was much better.

    As to points cost what would you rather have?
    Sister – 15 points, WS 3 BS 4, T3, Ss, 3+ ar save and a regroup faith power and an imm for 65 points with a twin linked melta gun.

    or for 20 points….
    Grey knight troop – WS4, S4, T4, power weapons, warp quake, force weapon, pyc protection, space marine regroup with 75 point tranpsort with a twin linked las cannon.

    Sadly, my sisters are resting pending a decent codex unless I’m playing similarly rubbish armies or just to put in a purely comical army.

    Someone said that they were too tough – they were only ever average in competitions. The fluff has got in the way of making a practical fun army – we can’t have sisters beating space marine.

    I just hope GW put out a really bad codex to see how strong the feelings were – i.e is it worth keeping them and putting a decent codex sometime in the future – maybe 2026?

  • James S

    Hi @Peter Smith, thanks for commenting. I’m sorry to hear you won’t be using your Sisters any more. You’re entitled to your opinion of course, but I’d like to point a couple of things out:

    A squad of 10 Sisters in the old book with a veteran, frags and kraks, a melta-gun, a flamer and a rhino was 220 points. The same squad is now 175 points. That’s a pretty huge reduction.

    Not that I think points are particularly important anyway, as I said above. My Sisters still wreaked some havoc (casually and in tournament) at the old point costs. I’ve won games using hundreds of points less than my opponents, and lost against people using hundreds of points less than me. It’s not an exact science.

    Secondly, people are forgetting that there were several (many) units in the old book that were rarely if ever fielded by anyone. Even though the new codex hasn’t maximized the power of every unit, it has at least made everything usable. I would quite happily use Repentia now, they can ride in a tank and are fleet. And they’re cheaper. Before I didn’t bother even buying the models.

    I keep seeing people comparing the Sisters to Grey Knights or marines. This is not an adequate comparison. You should compare them to Imperial Guard. They are not an all-rounder army made up of super-humans, or an elite force of psychic heroes. They are regular humans (yes, that means initiative 3 across the board), with a particular built-in playstyle. Orks are choppy. Guard are shooty. Sisters are dangerous at short range, as you rightly said.

    Think of an army of Sisters against an army of guardsmen. At the guardsmen’s range I don’t fancy the Sister’s chances. At the Sister’s preferred range they will eat the guard for breakfast. That’s how it’s meant to be. They aren’t marines, and they certainly aren’t Grey Knights, as I’m sure you know as a Sisters player. They never have been.

    One more thing. You said faith points were what kept the army alive. That’s true, but notice the past tense. Faith was what kept the Sisters going as an outdated force in the face of 5th edition armies. Now they can stand on their own two feet a bit better, it’s not so important.

    Anyway this is all opinion and speculation. Let’s have this discussion again in a year and we can see how the Sisters actually panned out 🙂

  • Peter Smith

    I’m not a meta gamer – I just like an army to be flexible and fun to play. It’s not about winning but it at least have to have a chance.

    This was a poorly written codex which has made an average army worse. Clearly not play tested – see above comments.

    Put is this way , how many sisters rapid firing bolters does it take to kill one generic space marine …. 2 shots, 1/2 hit, 1/2 wound, 1/3 get through armour save…… in short 6 on average. Rapid firing any space marine now simply means you get assaulted back who hits first in combat with WS4, S4 &T4….. This is before you add FNP, Furious charge…. etc. Now compare the points costs of the two.

    You’ll now need to add command units with confessors so you can have some close combat. Guess whats going to get killed first?

    They could have made so many simple tweaks to remove allies, make bad units playable – i.e PE’s init 4 with d6 extra movement. They’d still die but we’d play theme. Given one unit a fast vehicle – or even a repressor (oh no thats too powerful!).

    I just hope that GW actually put some time and effort into a real codex with workable rules. My reference to points was purely what other people are doing. Its not about loading a unit with abilities to equal the points – who would choose to pay for a useless faith point and 6+ inv, I’d rather have my models costing 8-10pts – ie guardsman in armour. It would mean more bolter shots!

    You need to look at the whole army – if 3/4 of the units are rubbish all you get is a one dimensional army. Hello new sisters.

    I think all sisters players used to go on the theory that you’d send in 3 units expecting to lose 1 or 2. The intention was that one unit would be sacrified by assaulting the enemy unit – so it would tie them up until your next go. You can then shoot and assault when the enemies numbers are less. Init 4, or +2 str, or +3 inv gave you options and made your opponent stop and think – what if?

    The comments that the old faith system was too complicated – there were 5 faith powers using over or under the models in the unit. How can that be considered difficult?

    I suppose the Imperium had to at least have one bad code.

    6th rumours include that the roll to hit vehicles depends on BS, speed and type of vehicle. Fast skimmers good – tanks bad. Come on all you rhinos, and immolators that move 6″ and fire 😦

    Sorry if I appear pessimistic – but this happened to blood angels and is a GW sales strategy. If enough people complain they may build a decent army based on the feedback. How long will we wait for 6th and then a real new codex.

    Your right, lets see how new sisters do in competitions, especially if there are less sisters players in competitions.

  • James S

    Fair enough. I’m not going to comment or speculate about 6th edition at all. Much like this release, I’ll just keep my mouth shut till it’s in my hands. Likewise I don’t think bringing up previous strategies brings anything to the discussion. Things have changed, therefore everything that happened before (including how the army was commonly used) is moot.

    It seems like we wanted or expected different things from this release, but that we had different hopes for it as well.

    I think we both expected a hold-over release designed to convert the Sisters to a 5th edition feel in terms of rules, by which I mean reduce points costs, remove obvious flaws, and simplify their rules. This is what we got.

    I also hoped that they would fit them to the background better than the last codex. It was well-written, but it was pretty much an elaborate justification as to why the Sisters of Battle book was suddenly full of Inquisition units. I wanted more variety in Ecclesiarchy units. I’ve been playing for a long time, and I was attracted to the Witch Hunters for the religious fanatic background more than anything else. I got what I hoped for, so I’m happy.

    It seems to me (and correct me if I’m wrong) that you hoped for an army that was not only updated with the gaps plugged, but one that stacked up against more recent releases in terms of power and complexity in how many builds it can successfully accomplish. I agree that this is not what was provided. So I understand your disappointment at least.

    And for what it’s worth I think Immolators should be Fast too, not to make them more competitive necessarily, but because that’s supposed to be their role on the battlefield and GW (well, Jervis) are always going on about how they build the rules around the lore and models.

    All I can say is that math-hammer aside, don’t just shelve them. You obviously played your Sisters in the previous environment when they weren’t the strongest army. Why give up now?

    I take it from this comment ” . . . lets see how new sisters do in competitions . . .” That you measure an army’s value mainly in how well its players do in formal competitions. I’m not calling you WAAC or anything, and I’m fine with competitive gaming, but we just don’t have the same attitude to the game at all I think.

    I go in tournaments every now and then and I try my best. But honestly I don’t give a crap if I win or lose in that environment, or which armies currently dominate. To me the real games are the ones I play with my mates casually. I don’t believe 40k is a robust system for competitive gaming so I don’t approach it that way.

    Each to their own though, and thanks for the discussion 😀

  • Martin Rouleau

    I cant really say anything for the new codex since I have not played enough wuth it, but I may have misread, (I am french) but how does spirit of the martyr special rule work with vehicules?? It says that it give inv. save of 6+…tank dont have save…



  • Peter Smith

    I just want a varied playable army. Even people who don’t play sister say theve been nerfed.

    If enough people complain and state what doesn’t work GK may change it.

    If people sit back back and don’t complaint nothing will change.

    Complain now.

  • James S

    @Martin Rouleau, tanks can get cover saves, and invulnerable saves work pretty much the same as cover saves (they aren’t affected by the AP value of a weapon). So just treat it like a 6+ cover save.

    We normally roll the cover save for vehicles after the hits, so if the tank saves you haven’t wasted time rolling for penetration. Hope that helps 🙂

  • Capn Stoogey

    Peter, we’ve been complaining for what seems like forever about the GW pricing structure down here in Australia and all that complaining got us diddly. Complain all you like, but I wouldn’t hold your breath mate. 😉

  • Graffhamboy

    Feels to me the best thing to do is to dust down your battle sisters and give the new codex a go. I’ve always felt that the best way to play SOB is to stick with the fluff. This has made SOB a fun if ideosynchratic army to play with friends and a poor army to play in tournaments.

    Lets face it – SOB have become a niche force. If a new codex creates new interest then we will get new models and an enhanced codex. If not then GW have no commercial interest to try harder.

    And this Codex is much easier to play. That plus new (plastic?) models will bring new players.I’d rather have something than SOB be allowed to whither on the vine.

  • Capn Krull

    Easier to play? It wasn’t rocket science in the first place.

    The review is futile, as the it is from the perspective of a partial sisters player. I quote ‘I played a 2750 pt. game just a little while back with a few of my Sisters in the mix’ and ‘Sisters are like Kroot Mercenaries to my mind’. Some of us would bring 2750 points of pure witch hunting mayhem to the table in such a scenario.

    To address the issues, those of us who do field full sister armies know all too well that their hand to hand survival capabilities were largely reliant on faith points, which are no longer ‘fit for purpose’. As their ranged capability was questionable in the first place (and remains so), then they’ve become inferior all round… to ‘my mind’.

    There was noted a reduction in troop cost. Fair enough, but you do realise a fair chunk of the saved points come from just evening out the price of a rhino? As you now need swarm tactics (i.e. more than 10 models per troop unit) then the troops simply won’t fit. Kinda defeats the saving eh?

    Not to mention I can no longer use some of my figures from the last codex with a sisters army list. Lets face it, sisters are witch hunters and part of the holy Ordos right? Yet for some reason I now can’t use Inquisitors, their retinues, Land Raiders, Inquisitorial Stormtroopers or Chimera. On that same point, we’ve lost Karamazov and his very impressive throne. You may begrudge the inquisition aspect, but they should really be part of the codex.

    Sure, it’s easier now for some to throw a basic unit of sisters under say Apocalypse rules into another army with these changes, but any list built on sisters at its core is no longer playable in any sense of the notion ‘even match’. Even if you ignore the hefty power down to faith capabilities, we’ve gained very little from the point reductions and can’t field our previous units without an expansion.

    Sounds fair then does it? Methinks not. Take a look at the battle report in issue 381. The only way the sisters won was due to deploying first so gaining combined fortress & emplacement benefits….

    It’s a shame really, as a lot of money goes into collecting sisters. All of it is now completely wasted from my perspective, much more than 2750 points is most definitely down the pan, as I’m not taking a used matchstick to a gun fight.

  • James S

    @Capn Krull, I’m a partial Sisters player now. In 4th ed I played pure Witch Hunters, so I’m not completely unqualified to speak about this. I certainly don’t think my opinion warrants the word “futile” in any case, as there are probably almost as many people around who used the Witch Hunters as allies as there are ‘pure’ players.

    As for the link between the Inquisition and the Sisters, I do begrudge it. I love the Inquisition background, and used to use them a lot. I have a Karamazov I built myself. But the Sisters were always (up until Codex Witch hunters) the militant arm of the church. Try suggesting to someone who played Sisters before the Witch Hunters book that they are “part of the Holy Ordos” and should share a book with Inquisition units and see what happens.

    I understand you are upset that you can’t play your army the way you used to be able to. I used to play Squats, in 40k and Epic.

    There are plenty of places you can go on the internet right now to complain about how the Sisters have been destroyed. I don’t agree, because what I want from the army (a re-connection with previous background and updated rules and points) was given to me. I suppose if you like you can come here and disagree with me about what I want, but I’m not sure what that will achieve.

    Oh, one more thing: condescension and sarcasm are not necessary – we’re all grown-ups here.

  • Ripgiblet

    It is nice to hear another opinion, Thanks James for the review.

    Before I saw the second part of the codex and just on information I was feeling very disappointed with the new sisters. (I winged allot of some other forums:] PS-I am tournament player, so I like every army to have a meta game…)

    After reading the codex, I am kind of feeling a little bit annoyed…
    The cheaper Rinos is excellent, that really annoyed me in the previous versions,and grenades and free superiors is all good.
    Just to point out some of the good things people might have missed.

    Other Advantages:
    1)Sister Repentia now have 2 attacks:] so 3 attacks on the charge. This make them usefull if they start behind another units tank, and jump in, it goes flat out, pops smoke, then next turn they jump out, run and multicharge s many vehicles as they can get to.. then probably die:]
    2)Seraphim come in groups of 5, so you can deep strike a unit with 4 inferno pistols beside a vehicle, or 4 hand flamers beside troops… for 140 or 120 points… not great… not a blood angles troop choice… but ok… and you got 3 loses to take before you lose the weapons.
    3)All sisters have frag and krak grenades, and a 6++, all pretty useless stuff… but it adds up.
    4)Dominion squads for 125 points in a rino with 2 meltas and scout… not great, but could be usefull… not an imperial guard veteran squad, but when the rino pops, you got better survival chances..

    Other Disadvantages:
    1)Rinos hold 10, so since sisters of battle troop units must have 10, your only troop choice can not be mechanised with any special characters…
    2)Retribution Heavy weapons teams with no range, and no useful vehicles to get them in range. Might be OK as heavy bolter fire, but pretty sure rending on firing weapons does not work on anything except for the extra +d3 on vehicles penetration on a roll of a 6. So they could be a sub par anti skimmer and walker defence… attacking 1 target per round.

    Made the army kind of a weak half way between guard and marines army, which is probably about correct. The problem is, they don’t have any strong points to work towards, your core troops are just cannon fodder now, not a force to be feared, they have to play defensively. And no real way to surprise the enemy that much. But I think they are still OK. I miss the old faith system, it gave our overpriced army awesome flexibility and I felt that I could take on all comers, now it will be playing the army to its fullest, and trying to scrape out wins, and watch them die in their droves.
    Saying they are a mid range army, is ok, but as everybody says that is 1 turn of bolter fire, or maybe a heavy flamer… ok against guard with lasguns standing in an open field(never happens) shooting at the sisters you might do well, but that 1 power fist, and or demo charge in the guard unit, and the game changes. I have fought against a basic guard squad with a unit of sisters, and that is both units tied up for 3-4 rounds, even though you would think the sisters could easily smash them the armour advantage is great but with 50 point squad and leader with power weapon for 10 and lascannon. The guard player had already written off the unit,only after 2 rounds did he finally decide to charge in a sentinel to finish me off.(Sentinel would have been enough on its own, since cant use grenades on it…)

    Yeah might be fun to play them, they may not be powerful, but if you focus on winning the mission, I think you can win games with them. Just treat them like guard in CC and marines in Shooting.

  • James S

    @Ripgiblet, thanks for your comment, it’s a really good, balanced review. I particularly like your summary at the end 😀

    With the troops, your comment about thinking about them like Guard is interesting. People are freaking out a little about mechanizing the army, but a Guard blob is pretty dangerous. 20 sisters with an attached cheap Canoness/character and a priest is a solid core for any army, backed up with mech elements. I’ve used squads of 20 sisters before and they’re a pain for the opponent to dig out.

    Mech is generally more flexible, but a blob of stubborn power armoured BS4 bolters has it’s uses too . . .

  • Ripgiblet

    Yeah but unless you give them fearless or stubborn you will lose 20 figures in 1 turn.

    With Jacob, you would be decent in cc as well, and be a fairly tough block to take out. But at a total cost of approx with multimelta and meltagun and Powersord… 360 is an expensive objective holder… would be OK though with 45+ Melee attacks in defence… And FNP, so could be a nice tar pit…

  • James S

    Yeah that’s what I was thinking, Canoness is stubborn, Jacobus is fearless and brings FNP. Lots of points, but good for defensive play.

  • Ripgiblet

    Nah Jacobus is Stubborn as well. But with I4 and Preferred Enemy and +1 attack…is fairly decent, although the Preferred enemy and righteous rage have the same effect if you charge in the current rules, so might be a bit overkill.(Might change in 6th Ed:] )

    I think Jacobus on his own, should be enough, ld 10 is ok… but he can be targeted and killed fairly easily.

    Another question, can you try multiple times for a single power, so for example if you really need your twin linked meltaguns, but fail the roll, can you use another faith point and roll again…

  • James S

    Oh yeah so he is. Kyrinov is Fearless.

    I don’t know about the faith, in the old rules you could only try one of each power per turn per unit.

    I reckon why not hey? Each unit only has one power. It doesn’t say you can’t (which is not surprising given GW’s “relaxed” rules-writing style), so why not burn them until you run out like orders in Infinity?

    I’m sure any tourney you go in will be able to rule for you anyway. Are you in Australia by the way? You sort of sound like an Aussie.

  • Ripgiblet

    Yeah I am Aussie:] Well spotted:] (Probably my Terrible spelling:])

    Yeah an FAQ will probably stop us from using another faith point and rolling again, but until then I think we do it, faith is so weak now that why not…

    Anyway I will get some games in early November and test my Sisters out, might be able to try them out in a tournament as well… (I have complete TAU, NIDS, ELDAR, Dark Eldar,Necron and Kroot Mercenary armies. With access to Blood Angels, Dark Angels, Vanilla Marines, Imperial Guard, Ork and Grey Knights armies. So during tournaments I like to use a different army every time…)

    Anyway the strategy will be, ignore the power game, and win the objectives. So we need the ability to take and hold, capture objectives and minimise kill points…

    I will post my 1500 point list on here later… to get some feedback…
    Maybe a 1750 point list as well…

  • James S

    @Ripgiblet, go for it, I’ll have a look at a list. The last tournament I played in though was Cancon in January, so my knowledge of the new Grey Knights, Dark Eldar and Space Wolves is purely theoretical. I’ve never played against those armies.

    Come to think of it I haven’t played against the new nids yet either 😦 My regular opponents are 50% marines, and tournaments seem to have a higher proportion of marines these days too.

    You can probably get some good feedback on the wargamerau forums too if you haven’t already.

    I could tell you were an Aussie because you wrote “yeah” and “nah” a lot 😉

  • Peter

    Have you seen the sudden number of sister of battle armies on EBAY. Bad sign 😦 Still I can buy some cheaply next year if I still have my job – plenty of time to paint them pre-next release. If the next “real” sisters codex is pants it will be another sisters army for sale.

    If so it may be chaos marines or dark eldar- not the best but good concept and definitely fun.

    Good luck with Sisters Repentia – I would love them to be a good unit. They have the style and models but not the rules. If I was your opponent I’d simply shoot them good – FNP with no armour.

    The sisters appear now one dimensional. It will be interesting seeing the different combinations of workable units people use. Not many sisters players where I live to watch though. Much fewer now.

    I just wish GW would draw the line with fluff vs playability. GK (aka daemonhunters) have force weapons – daemons have inv saves and eternal warrior or 1 wound? GK have little pyshic defence despite being the best imperium pyschics? Hence not really fluff material.

    Yet, Sisters get downgraded as those who never play them and don’t realise the difficulty in playing an army ruled by faith points cry foul. Its not like the old faith point system could ever compete fully with new release armies anyway.

    Part of me hopes that the new sisters armies prove as weak as I think – maybe then GW will upgrade them. If we rely on short range firepower we need a balance of:
    1) Good short range firepower
    2) Movement to get into range – I expect it will be sorted in the next release with valkries – more expense. (why not have fast rhinos like BA)
    3) Defence to last long enough while getting into range
    4) Some close combat/flexibility/something to make your opponent guess.
    5) Workable faith point syste,

    I’m not after them becoming space marines or guard in armour, or uber powerful. Just fun and playable.

  • James S

    If i wasn’t flat broke I would pick some up . . .

    Seriously though, it staggers me that people sell their armies when rules change. I can’t imagine anyone buying Sisters of Battle because they were super-competitive, ever. Which means they bought them for other reasons, and spent hours building and painting them, and probably made an army they could be proud of, and now when the rules change they sell them? Are these people just hot-tempered? Why is win-potential suddenly the most important thing to them? I honestly don’t get it, it doesn’t make sense.

    I can understand putting them on the display shelf or even away in a box until they get rules you’re happy with, but selling them seems like a foolish over-reaction. Really, they’re not an army unless they’re on the table. They’re a collection of models. People are selling a collection of models they painstakingly collected because of a couple of magazine articles :/

  • James S

    @Peter, I see what you mean with fluff and playability though. Some consistency would be nice.

    Still, for me it’s really all about whether or not something captures my imagination. I’ll put up with crap rules if I like the concept and models, but conversely I’ve sold lovingly painted armies before when I lost interest in the concept. Can’t imagine selling an army because the rules suck though.

  • Peter Smith

    I got into sisters because I liked the models and the concept (this was when 4th was out), and had a GK section in the army as allies. I was originally going to due pure GK but they were too expensive points wise.

    I liked the idea of faith points, the randomness and accepted that half the army list really wasn’t any good. They were still playable though – lots of Rhinos and immolators rushing foward. I’d win/draw 1/3 to 1/2 of games. My painting is not great – hence I’m more of a player.

    For me when 5th came out, the rules badly hurt the seraphim “assault units” but were fair to other comparable units. Since the next generation of codexes have given other armies so much movement and inititiave and the emphasis has switched back to assault. With the faith points sisters were just about able to hang on in combat. Opponents hated the 3+ inv or +2 init. You wouldn’t ultimately win the combat but you could tie up nasty gribblies for a few rounds, or more importantly be unpredictable and make your opponent think. Send in 3 units – lose 2 but hold the objective…. etc.

    I have been patient with the sisters rules, the new DW codex really hurt them. 6th will come out – which will really hurt any big tanks/rhinos – more bad news!, then at some point a NEW REAL SISTER CODEX (Hurrah!). If the codex is wrong as this one then I cannot wait another 5-10 years before GW finally get round to having another attempt, or worse case bin the army as no one buys the models.

    I could have 5 years of playing of an army where the codex makes them flexible, unpredictable and fun, or sell them when someone will buy them.

  • James S

    Fair enough. I suppose when I think about it, it was painting that got me into the hobby in the first place. If I wasn’t really into that then the game would become more important, so I see your point.

  • Ripgiblet

    Funny I thought I already posted my army list here:]

    I came back to check the responses… and it isn’t here lol…

    OK anyway from what I can remember it was a pretty weak list. Something like:
    4 x (10 Sisters with rino, hunterkiller missile, meltagun, powersword, heavy flamer.)
    5 Seriphim 4xHandFlamers
    1 Angel Seriphim Characters…(Forgot the name…)
    5x Seriphim 4xFusion Pistols…
    2 x Excorcists…

    1495 Points…

    Now I like to base my army around the troops, but in this codex the troops can’t be mechanised with a special character… and cant have long range weapons… kind of makes them tar pits if your lucky… but anyway:] lets see:]
    It will be a good chance to play people who don’t like to play me anymore since I normally smash them:] and let them at least decimate my army;} (And I might still win by pulling cheesy rules or last minute desperation moves;} )

    Another option would be replace 4 troops with a foot slogging backline of 20 with Jacobus, with a couple of mobile Rinos up front, but my problem with any list that mixes, foot and mech is that you lower your vehicle count, and allow the opponents anti-vehicle to focus…

  • James S

    @Ripgiblet that looks like a solid list to me. It seems well balanced, you have fast moving anti-infantry, multi-purpose mechanized troops and some heavy support. You’re right the troops can’t be very good tarpits but they are decent objective grabbers. They’ll take a fair bit of fire to shift.

    You’re second list sounds good too. Maybe you could use the rhinos to protect the flank of your infantry. Who cares if they get blown up, you’re not likely to die from that with a 3+ save, and they’ll absorb fire while you advance with the large unit.

  • Ripgiblet

    Thanks for the feedback, I will give it a go and let you know… hoping that it will do better than it looks on paper…
    I think my old battle sisters codex army would take it to the cleaners… but what can you do lol:]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: