That would be my preferred solution too, or for Lord I to simply adopt my retributor stats, as he acknowledges that Heavy Bolters are much more their iconic weapon.

Why not just have two kinds of Retributors?

Retributora Domini and Retributora Gloria or something. One kind has the multi-meltas, one kind has the heavy bolters? Then give the Dominions the meltaguns.

_________________
The Apocrypha of Skaros 1.1
Rogue Trader Expedition 0.4
The Horus Heresy 0.5
Night Lords 0.1
My Trade Thread

That's one of the proposals on the table, different names for retributors in the two lists.

Technically they do already have different names: Lord I's are Retributors and mine are Adepta Sororitas Retributors, but I'm not sure this is enough.

Okay we seem to be getting somewhere.

I'm willing to accept retributors as having 2x heavy bolters although I still maintain meltas are more iconic. "Most often used in 40k" is not necessarily the best measure of this. But anyway, I agree.

If we can give Dominions effectively fusion gun stats then I guess one ranged shot is a compromise between 0 and 2 so that seems fair and gels well. I'd still prefer the multi tag but as that's just semantics I guess I can live with it.

I'm happy to consider other changes such as the exorcist changes.

As to Faithful I'm willing to consider the whole-formation effects and regroup, but I'd really like to axe the character dependence. I don't want to be forced to include a character in every formation to use this seldom-required ability. I also tend to lose my characters! Anyway it doesn't really follow that the leaders should be be more "faithful" than the humble rank and file (something u dislike about 40k rules) and in any case in 40k in practice every sororitas unit is faithful - everyone buys those superiors.

With reduced air support, inducted guard being toned down into a skeleton force of frateris militia and an eye to replacing titans with cathedrals in the future, I'm actually pretty happy about this. I'm happy to consider most other changes such as exorcists without much quibble. I'll get back to individual units later.

Given the issues over these units I thought I'd put up a complete list of my stat changes and reasons:

Canonness: Lost commander and leader to gain Supreme Commander and Faithful.

As I included Palatines as a commander, level character it seemed sensible to make the Canoness a supreme commander.

Battle Sisters: Lost faithful as part of my consolidation of faithful onto the sororitas characters.

Retributors: Lost multimeltas for heavy bolters, upped from FF4+ to FF3+ as they no longer have MW FF and have devestator level firepower. Lost faithful

Seraphim: Removed Hand Flamers.

There was a general consensus that ignore cover firefight doesn't really work/have rules. Because of this I removed hand flamers from their profile; definitely too small scale to track at epic scale. Kept faithful.

Sisters Repentia: Dropped from speed 20cm to 15cm, gained infiltrators.

I feel this is a better track across of their 40k abilities, and this change was carried forward to all the units with holy rage in 40k.

Exorcist: Changed Exorcist launcher from 45cm D3x AP6+/AT5+ to 60cm 2xAP6+/AT4+.

I know it has random shots in 40k, but that's not something that needs to be represented at this scale. Over the course of an epic turn (a whole game of 40k in timescale) the number of shots will average out. This isn't an ork weapon where the randomness is part of the fun, I just found it annoying and it slowed the game down unnessarily. I upped to AT4+ as I feel that's a better representation of multiple S8 AP1 shots, and because it was frankly awful before; just compare it to a predator. The range increase is artificial for two reasons. Firstly to allow some longer ranged shooting in the list, and make exorcists worthwhile, and secondly because I've always found it bizarre that a vertically firing missile system like the exorcist has such a short range in 40k. The 48" range is not an issue on a small 40k board, but at epic scale it makes it rubbish. It is rumoured to be becoming indirect in the next 40k codex, but that would be too big of a change without confirmation.

Replaced Banisher with Hunter; I don't see the need to make up units when there are perfectly good existing ones to use instead.

Arco Flagellants lost their special teleport, lost extra MW attack, increased to CC2+, gained infiltrators

Big changes here. I actually quite like the way you have them work in your list, but it's not particularly background represntative, since they're supposed to be "dangerous to know" and noone goes near them. Also, with no inquisitor formations in this list I couldn't use the same mechanic. Their weapons in 40k are low strength power weapons, much like Banshee power swords, not high strength power weapons like power fists or Evicerators. Only these larger weapons are usually given MW status in epic; low strength power weapons tend to instead have an excellent CC value (see banshees as the only other example of a low strength, power weapon armed unit). Hence I went for CC2+ instead of 4+ with an extra MW. This also helps to define their role as different from repentia. Infiltrators is again a straight match across of holy rage from 40k, as well as representing them being "activated".

I'm not entirely happy with the results, however, and would certainly be open to discussion on better ways to represent this iconic Ecclesiarchy unit.

Penitent Engines Again swapped 20cm move for 15cm move and infiltrators to represent holy rage. Lost invulnerable save, made their flamers into effectively a heavy flamer, as that's what they count as in 40k. Lost ignore cover firefight for the same reason as Seraphim. Increased CC from 4+ to 3+ but reduced MW extra attacks from D3 to 1. Reduced to from FF4+ to FF5+.

Lots more changes. Again, I don't see the need for the D3; it slows things down and doesn't really add much. Not sure why your version had an invulnerable save. Obviously I'm flexible on the weapon/CC stats. FF change is simple; they're not going to be as shooty as a whole 5 woman sister squad with effectively just a heavy flamer and nothing else.

Honestly I'd much rather keep them as they are. It doesn't impinge on your list, and I think meltaguns should be just a FF weapon. There's no need for you to add Dominions to the Witch Hunters list, they're abstracted out at that level. They're only in this list since it focuses more on the sisters.



I'm adamant about the regroup at the very least; I think it's very appropriate for a praying formation to be able to lose BMs, and it neatly makes it a Hold action with extra bonuses.

I'd very much like to keep the faithful on characters, as otherwise I simply can't see anyone ever taking them. Priests would always be a better choice, much as space marine craptains are never seen. They'd have to be made sillily cheap, or priests sillily expensive.

Unless you can come up with another way to make the sisters characters worthwhile that is...

No. They specifically use meltaguns, not some arbitrary concept of "melta weapons". Plus "melta weapons" already has a profile that doesn't have MW FF.

Fine, it’ll require some renaming to make the lists match but that’s not a big deal to me. I note, however, that the Palatine does not have Inspiring. I presume this is intentional? If the Palatine had Inspiring then it would match my version of the Canoness and I’d just rename my Canoness as Palentine and then the lists would be in sync.


As I’ve noted elsewhere, this is one of the only changes I don’t like.


Fine with that if we can agree on a Dominion unit that replaces my melta Retributors.


Fine.


Agreed.


Fine on the non-random shots, probably for the best. 45cm isn’t rubbish on a 30cm move tank, I’m not sure about the move to a longer range. For someone that’s such a stickler for 40K mechanics, this seems out-of-character for you, zombocom I'd rather it stuck with 45cm for playtesting, only moving to 60cm if absolutely unavoidably necessary.


The rationale for the Banisher is that it differentiates the sisters from the space marines – apart from the ubiquitous rhino, sisters actually don’t share ANY vehicles with the astartes. It seems unlikely they’d have hunters. Plus I was thinking of the old-style exorcists with the rotating missile turret – doesn’t that just scream anti-aircraft to you?
http://homepage.mac.com/james.clay/iblo ... index.html

Real life
http://zachtracer.files.wordpress.com/2 ... est_08.jpg

It’s only a small step from Exorcist to AA missile tank, why not make the jump? Epic has always been the place for new AA vehicles – we have hydra finally in 40K after how many years in Epic?


Well, as I’m sure you know, I’ve had endless problems with this unit, so I’m open to any changes. The “Dangerous to Know” rule is just a 40K mechanic to prevent characters from joining them for game balance reasons, there’s no fluff justification for that. Arcos were first introduced in Inquisitor, and they are usually described as being brought along as bodyguards or assassin/living weapons. Similarly, in the Eisenhorn series they’re brought along by an Inquisitor and spend most of the time – until activated! – as cloaked followers. Hence the teleport rule. Which is fiddly and perhaps overcomplicated, and they could be used as a simple extra unit as you have done. Still, it’d be nice to have SOME kind of special rule to represent them being activated. Perhaps they could replace a unit upon activation? What you thought were more basic infantry were cloaked arcos? Meh, maybe not.

While I agree about making exorcists and the like a fixed number of shots, I would have thought that +D3 attacks for arcos wouldn’t be too much hassle and shows the unpredictability of these units. As for MW I firmly believe that Banshees should have MW status, so I don’t much like that logic, but if it makes you feel better, arcos in Inquisitor when activated and stimmed up can easily match the damage output of a powerfist with their electroflails. Arcos are sadly rather underpowered in 40K, at least strengthwise.


Okay with the move change and heavy flamer. Prefer to keep the D3 in this case – if nothing else it makes them more dangerous in combat than a Dreadnought, which is as it should be. Invulnerable save is there for two reasons – to match the arcos, and to represent the Rampage rule, which is mechanically identical to Daemonic Possession. All Daemon Engines have an Invulnerable save, so it matches nicely. The Inv is their drugged-up/pious unrelenting frenzy and lack of any kind of fear!


What I’m saying is that they ARE in my list, I just call them Retributors. The 2x Heavy Bolter unit is the new unit, which I’m okay with. But mechanically, dominions with meltaguns are functionally identical in 40K to fire dragons, so I think we should adopt the fusion gun stats. Put another way, heavy flamers should be a pure-FF weapon, yet they’re a 15cm range weapon and they’re shorter ranged than meltaguns! (Incidentally, I think heavy flamers should have been an extra FF attack not a 15cm AP attack, but we’re stuck with that now.)

You offer me a compromise and now you’re taking it away when I agree? Methinks you've had evil whisperings in your ear. I’d rather we fudged things to give them the pre-existing multi-melta profile since it’s mechanically identical and to my mind it really doesn’t matter at an Epic scale whether they’re toting big meltaguns or little ones, they’re both fire-fight range anti-tank weapons.

From a list perspective one 15cm MW5+ attack is effectively a 6+ (since you are unlikely to use it on anything other than a double, otherwise you’d be assaulting!). I’d prefer two ranged attacks like my old-style Retributors but I’m prepared to compromise on one.


Absolutely fine, good idea even. If you can agree to give faithful back to all sororitas units, I’m willing to accept the other changes – I think the regroup is good. Not sure about affecting vehicles, but I guess I can try it out. I don’t understand your earlier objection (Faithful effectively is mainly used for bunkering down and holding objectives. As such, it's about surviving, but the bonuses were often made useless in your version because the vehicles in the formation were not protected, so the formation would still take a bunch of kills and break) that without Fearless across the board the formation breaks easier though – Fearless makes no difference to whether a formation breaks or not. Faith giving their TANKS thick rear armour feels wonky to me, but if you think it’s necessary then I can go with it.


Sure. Perhaps Inspiring to the Palantine and (more importantly) remove Priests from the sororitas upgrade options. Priests should be off leading the redemptionists, looking after the flagellants or the frateris milita! What’re the sisters doing with a priest tagging along with just a robe anyway? He’d be shredded by the first frag grenade.


Come on man, ever heard of abstraction? You’re willing to arbitrarily extend the range on an exorcist but the concept of calling a unit armed with melta weapons “melta weapons” too much? Yes, it does jar with the raptors, but then the raptors profile never made a lot of sense and that datafax could be changed (perhaps to “flame weapons”) to make ours work.

Meh, not a big deal, this is all semantics if we have the same profile. You can call them meltaguns if you like.

So in conclusion:
Happy with virtually all changes. The only ones I’m unsure about:

• I need to make the characters match up with my list – my “canoness” can’t have Supreme Commander in my list, obviously, but I wanted an inspiring leader type, so either that needs to match up with the palentine (i.e. inspiring) and I change my list to palentine, or we need a new name (perhaps, as your canoness is a supreme commander, should could be a Canoness Superior? There’s also the intermediate rank Canoness Preceptor or simply Preceptor?)
• I like Banishers, I’d prefer them (with appropriate changes, non-D3 shots for example) to just jamming hunters in where they stick out like a sore thumb
• I’m undecided about Arcos and Penitents stats. I think both should belong incorporated into other formations as they require handlers rather than their own formation.
• I think Dominions should have one or two 15cm MW5+ attacks, don’t care what you call the weapon. Candyfloss launchers, whatever.
• Still don’t like Faithful on characters, but happy to accept other changes to Faithful.

Oh and incidentally, one other change I was thinking of – the Immolator should probably be FF3+ to match the ork and IG flame-tanks.

Right now I need to step away from Tactical Command... slipping into old, bad habits again...

It is indeed intentional, to provide a difference between priests and sisters characters. However, as I'm going to discuss below, I'm perfectly happy to shift priests to redeptionists, militia and repentia only and give inspiring (and MW to the CC EA ) of the palatine, so it matches your canoness, which you can then rename.



I'll happily drop it back to 45cm for now, though I'm pretty convinced it needs a range boost. BTW I'm not really a stickler on 40k mechanics, I'm a stickler on matching the background. I think the exorcist is under-ranged in 40k compared to its background as a balistically firing artillery piece.



I can only repeat that I'm not in favour of making things up when it's not absolutely neccesary; I think the banisher sticks out a lot more than the hunter. TBH though the hunter sticks out in the marine list too as something that doesn't exist in 40k either. The Whirlwind Hyperios is the 40k rhino hulled AA vehicle.

I'd rather wait and get other people's opinions on this one.



Yeah, they're a nightmare to try to represent properly at this scale. Some kind of special rule is probably called for. Maybe give them two profiles, but once activated they take a dangerous terrain test every turn? Or is that just too much micromanagement?



EA +D3 and infiltrators could be the bonus for activating them if we do go with such a special rule?

On the MW issue I'm inclined to leave the MW off for now, firstly because I'm not in agreement with you about banshees, but more importantly because it makes them notably different in role to repentia. With MW they are literally just Repentia but better, and that given that there is (at the very least) uncertainty over the strength of their weapons, we should go with the choice that has a niche role in the list.

I don't set much store by Inquisitor's strength and damage rules; space marines throwing their bolters to do more damage than firing them, for example.



I could bring back the D3 I guess, though note that I went for CC3+ instead to represent them being nastier than dreadnoughts. I'm not sold on the invulnerable save; Land Raiders have a similar rule to Daemonic Possession and don't get an invulnerable save. Daemon inv saves is one of those areas that isn't a direct transfer from the 40k rules, it's effectively a flavour thing.



Thats the rationale for their fearlessness, not why they can somehow survive a deathstike missile in the face.



Frankly I agree with you on heavy flamers; not sure why they were ever made a shooting attack.

I could compromise on fusion gun stats, but I'd still rather just rename my Retributors to solve the problem. Bear in mind that every single fire dragon carries a fusion gun; only 2-4 dominions in a squad do. They don't deserve the same level of power.



The compromise is still potentially on the table, but it's not my favoured option. I'd rather rename my retributors.

It matters a lot to me that the constantly mobile dominions don't use the cumbersome multimeltas. That's the retributors job, and I'm not in favour of fudging while there are other options available.



Ok, agreed.



It's not the fearless that helps them from breaking, it's the Thick Rear Armour and Invulnerable Save.

Remember that the vehicles are driven by Sisters. Space Marine vehicles get ATSKNF because they're crewed by Marines; Sisters vehicles should get faithful for the same reason.

Probably the best option is to reword the rule back to how it was in your version (with the addition of regrouping), and to give faithful to the Sisters' vehicles.



Reluctantly agreed, though I'll keep priests on Repentia as well, since they fit well there and they can't take Heroines anyway.



I'd rather keep with Palatine and Canoness; why not restructure your list to include both? I've never liked that you take the Inquisitor Lord upgrade on a Canonness to get supreme commander.



Agreed in your list, but in an Ecclesiarchy list they deserve their own formations; they're pretty much the key two ecclesiarchal units.



Happy to make that change, they're a little weak compared to Repressors in my list currently I think anyway.

Just modify their FF value if you don't want them as killy as Fire Dragons, they still deserve to be MW if they're packing Meltaguns.

I agree they should be MW FF, what I don't agree is that they should have a ranged MW shot.

Im going to run a game of "Escort Duty" tonight with my v1.1 list against IG Steel Legion. I wont be making any of the suggested changes, above, just yet so this can be a "last hurrah" to see what you think of the list "as-is".

That should be interesting!

I'm hoping to get in a test game with them myself this week.

It was a really fun game.

The 30cm range on the Rets was critical. 60cm range on Exorcists was also critical once, as even then a few of the units were out of range.

Biggest problem was the SoBs having zero ranged anti-tank firepower. I'll write the BatRep up this afternoon, but you'll see 2 formations with Immolators do dumb things trying to reach a broken IG Armored Company formation just to inflict casualties via Blast Markers. The only weapon capable of doing that? The Immolator's Heavy Flamers It was a little silly.

The SoBs and Repentia got in an awesome combined assault at one point. Other than the Repentia whiffing all 7 of their MW attacks, I was happy with them.

Report to follow...