|
I found the recent post on the proposed update very interesting. I’ve been using a Sisters army for about six years now, mainly against Codex Marines and Black Legion at 3,000 points in a non-competitive environment.
Overall, I think the proposals are perfectly acceptable. I have no issue with downgrading Initiative to 2+, nor disagree with the majority of unit stat changes. The Lightning Fighter is a welcome addition and the titans will certainly help out at times. However, I do have reservations about the inter-relationship between the new Initiative 2+, the new Acts of Faith, and the newly revised CC 6+ value of many Sisters.
In the previous v.2.1 list the Sisters were Initiative 1+. If they wished to avail themselves of the sole Act of Faith they modified this by -1, effectively succeeding with their action test roll on 2+. They thus had a one-in-six chance of failing the Act of Faith order and adopting Hold instead.
The Sisters now have Initiative 2+. If they avail themselves of any of the new Acts of Faith they again modify this by -1, effectively now needing an action test roll of 3+. They would now have a much greater one-in-three chance of failing an Act of Faith order.
In my view it is always very much better to succeed with any chosen order than it is to fail an action test and be forced to adopt Hold. To risk increasing your chances of failing your action there must be an adequate reward to incentivise players to attempt it. It is here that I believe the inter-relationship of the above mentioned factors may be unsatisfactory. I think that the new risk-reward relationship may actually discourage use of the Acts of Faith with the reward gained being insufficient to justify the risk of the increased chance of action test failure.
Furthermore, as they currently stand, I think that the five new Acts of Faith are not of roughly equal utility and some, perhaps even only one, may be predominantly chosen in preference to all the others. I wonder too whether the new Acts of Faith rule may now prove to add more complication than its utility justifies. My preference would be to keep matters as straightforward as possible.
My view of the new Acts is as follows:
1) Hand of the Emperor. Superficially, this appears rather powerful but I think its effects will be quite limited. If the Sisters were Codex Marines with a CC value of 4+ then this option would indeed be attractive as half of all attacks on average would result in hits, all of which would benefit from Macro-weapon. The revised Sisters’ CC value of 6+ will however see only one attack in six on average result in a hit, so perhaps only Seraphim will really benefit from this Act. It is, in my view, a very marginal gain in return for the one-in-three chance of failing to activate.
2) Divine Guidance. This seems much more attractive with most Sisters benefitting from a modified FF value of 3+. However, the Sisters have relatively little difficulty in hitting in a FF with their ordinary value of 4+. As with Hand of the Emperor I don’t think the additional benefit justifies the risk of failing your Engage action.
3) The Passion. Another superficially powerful ability that may fail to deliver. As most Sisters have CC 6+, again on average only one pre-emptive attack in six will result in a hit. The benefit of First Strike really kicks in if one can denude several enemy units before they can attack back. Again, only Seraphim may really benefit (and Repentia don’t qualify). Is this another marginal gain for the increased chance of failing the action test?
4) Light of the Emperor. This is identical to the previous single Act of Faith benefit. It applies to all eligible Sisters and its utility remains unchanged. This is fine, but is it now worth doubling your chances of failing to activate to receive it? I don’t think so.
5) Spirits of the Martyr. If I were to choose a new-style Act of Faith, this is the only one where I consider the new risk-reward approaches acceptability, primarily as the benefits last until the end of the turn. This can help the Sisters survive the inevitable enemy counterattacks. There is really nothing to complain about here except that it may in fact be too powerful! Sisters have armour 4+ and can make very good use of the Reinforced Armour re-roll. It would not nearly be so good for an Ork with 6+ armour!
To summarise, I don’t think the benefits as currently constituted are generally worth the risk of losing a chosen action. I don’t think this is a result of just one thing but rather it comes from a combination of factors. If the Sisters CC value were reinstated to 5+ then potentially that may help redress the balance but it is clear you want to keep them at CC 6+. If the Sisters were again Initiative 1+ then the chance of activation failure using the Acts would be just one-in-six again, and might justify the risk. I don’t think that’s what you want to do either, and I also actually support the change to Initiative 2+.
So, some preamble before I suggest my solution. One of the most significant difficulties I perceive for Sisters in having a CC value of 6+ is that they are now more likely to lose an assault, either their own Engage action or a subsequent enemy counter-Engage. In my view, winning an assault is crucial to succeeding with Sisters given their poor long-range firepower and consequent inability to “stand-off” and shoot instead. The Sisters will naturally try to use their FF value in an assault wherever possible but the reality is that their enemy will prioritise getting them into base contact, to force them to use their CC value. Once contacted in CC the Sisters are now only hitting on sixes rather than on 5+ (thus halving their chances of hitting). If defeated, the Sisters may also suffer increasingly disproportionate casualties from the rout as the disparity of casualties caused by each side will now be greater (to the dis-benefit of the Sisters).
Keeping the new rules and stats, a solution might be to enable the Sisters to more easily survive a rout after losing an assault by using the original Act of Faith rule (now Light of the Emperor) which, by making units Fearless, prevents the additional casualties. As only the infantry now benefit their transports will suffer but that’s likely to be what a player would chose to eliminate anyway.
My proposal would be to:
1) Retain the new initiative rating of 2+.
2) Replace the new Acts of Faith with a revised version of the previous Act of Faith rule, a rule that has been under test for a number of years and has not been discarded by the current revision.
3) Remove the -1 modifier to an action test and instead make the Act of Faith an integral benefit of passing the action test. As the Sisters now ordinarily activate on the same score they needed previously to obtain the Act of Faith this is, in essence, not a material change, except that vehicles are perhaps rightly no longer eligible.
Thus, all eligible Sisters (as per the new rules) would now be “faithful” once they successfully activate until the end of the turn. This method retains the Sisters vulnerability should their opponents act first but otherwise always gives them a benefit once they have activated. Though they may now lose more assaults, they will better survive the consequences of losing, giving them the potential of continuing the fight next turn by rallying in the end phase. Perhaps that might help reflect their tenacity and determination now that they “fight” less effectively?
My suggested revised Acts of Faith special rule might read as follows:
SPECIAL RULE
Acts of Faith
All missions and Dominion formations are faithful. When a faithful formation passes its action test, it carries out the chosen action as usual. In addition, all of its infantry units gain fearless and invulnerable save until the end of the end phase. Formations that fail their action test do not receive these benefits.
|
