Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

This is the result of my analysis of Space Marine weapons and upgrades in the new edition. Some other armies have access to these weapons as well, but the prices are computed using SM stats and in the context of the SM codex - for instance, I praise storm bolters as a vehicle upgrade, but Imperial Guard armies might actually not want to take them since they have access to heavy stubbers instead, which are better for long range vehicles (though worse for close range ones now). With that addressed, let's get to it!


The Good:

Storm bolters. Any character who doesn't have a combi-weapon should probably take a storm bolter; any vehicle except for perhaps a Whirlwind should tack on the pintle mount. Storm bolters got both cheaper and better this edition, and as such will probably see widespread play.

Combi-weapons. While combi-weapons are more expensive now, the fact that the special weapon component has unlimited ammo and can be used alongside the bolter is a huge buff. Combi-weapons are now essentially better special weapons - you probably should have been giving these to your Sergeants before, but you should really be giving them to your Sergeants now.

Plasma. Plasma weapons now have a "safe mode" for engaging basic troops and can amp it up when encountering heavier targets. Yes, the overheats are nastier now (especially for characters and vehicles), but you don't have to risk them if you don't want to, and a standard plasma blast is solid against most targets, saving the big shots for Terminators, vehicles, Primaris Marines, etc.

Heavy bolters. The humble heavy bolter has been bad for a long time, but now it's time to shine - the new AP system makes this weapon much more effective against Marines, while the cheap price means it'll be easy to include on a range of units. Stormtalons love this one!

Lascannon. Volume of fire often won out over more powerful shots in previous editions, since those powerful shots didn't reliably kill vehicles and could only put one wound on monsters, but the new wound system means the Lascannon may be one of the best anti-tank options widely available - while also meaning you'll do an average of 3.5 wounds to enemy monsters instead of 1 (assuming your shot gets through, of course!) - big improvements!

Assault cannon. This gun lost its Rending, but gained two shots, and the twin-linked changes mean the version of this weapon mounted to several Marine vehicles got substantially better to boot. I don't think we're quite in the goofy 4th edition assault cannon spam meta, but these will definitely be worthy of consideration on a range of units.

Twin-linked weapons in general. Twin-linked guns are much stronger this edition, and Marines benefit significantly from that - hurricane bolters, Razorback turrets, and especially Land Raiders all got huge firepower increases. Sometimes they pay for this in points - but not always! The hurricane bolter sponsons on the Stormraven are a complete no-brainer now.


The Bad:

Grav guns. Yes, grav was overused in past editions, but the nerfhammer really came down hard on the humble grav gun. This weapon went from Salvo 2/3 to Rapid Fire 1, meaning that it went from firing three shots when stationary at 18" to firing only one. This nerf means grav guns are going to be seen much less frequently, since they no longer provide volume of anti-infantry fire. Note that the grav-cannon is still quite solid - it's just the basic gun that doesn't pass muster.

Missile launchers. I should preface this remark by saying that missile launchers are not actually bad, they're just bad for their cost. In editions past, missile launchers were cheap heavy weapons that were OK vs. infantry and OK vs. tanks. They didn't see too much play (aside from Long Fang spam in 5th edition) because their lack of AP2 meant they didn't do enough against certain big targets, while the frag missile wasn't really good enough against infantry - but at least they were cheap! In 6th edition, attempts were made to revive the missile launcher with the flakk anti-air upgrade, but this proved expensive for its cost and was not widely used.

Now that the new AP system means former AP3 weapons aren't hamstringed against big monsters, missile launchers are much better. The problem is they aren't cheap anymore - a missile launcher costs as much as a lascannon! If you want anti-tank, the lascannon provides better firepower for the same price; if you want anti-infantry, the heavy bolter is cheaper and better. That doesn't mean missile launchers are totally useless - in low points games, they may well see play for their flexibility - but in larger armies, I expect they will be infrequently used, since you can get better weapons for any given role - sometimes at a cheaper price!

Multi-meltas. As with the missile launcher, huge cost increases meant this went from being a cheap but effective heavy weapon to a more powerful but prohibitively expensive one. When a lascannon costs less than a multi-melta, why take the multi-melta? Fast moving units may be able to use these effectively despite the costs, but I'm skeptical.

Hunters. This tank's main weapon is very powerful, but single-shot weapons really aren't the thing in this edition.

Centurions. While these guys can do some major damage, the weapon damage changes have been very unkind to these sorts of units. Previously, a lascannon would do one of three wounds if it got through; now, that same lascannon wound will kill the Centurion outright 2/3 of the time. Yes, the Centurions shoot like crazy now, especially when equipped with hurricane bolters, but they seem too vulnerable to heavy weapons to keep around.

Land Speeders. For some reason the Land Speeder hull costs more than a Rhino or even a Dreadnought, its durability is vastly lower, it gets penalties to its accuracy when moving and firing, and it can't Deep Strike anymore. Some are saying this unit is good when equipped with two heavy flamers, but the traditional Land Speeder patterns (especially the Typhoon) took hard hits this edition.


The Ugly:

Thunderfire Cannon. This unit lost a point of Strength, lost its special fire modes, became less resilient, costs more, can't use blast templates to pull off trick shots anymore, and lost Bolster Defenses. Ouch. At least we can ally in superior IG artillery now?

Camo-cloaks. Changes to the cover rules make +1 to your cover save vastly less relevant than in previous editions, but this upgrade is still priced as if it were upgrading a pseudo-invulnerable save rather than one that can be reduced by AP. Consider that a Scout with camo-cloak has the same save as a Tactical Marine in cover and an inferior save in the open or when engaged by Ignores Cover weapons; now consider that that Scout actually costs more than the standard Marine thanks to the expensive camo-cloak! I'm hoping this one gets seriously reduced in price - hopefully as low as 1 ppm.

Cyclone Missile Launchers. Not only are these overpriced like normal missile launchers, for some reason they do 2d3 shots when firing their frag missiles instead of 2d6. I suspect this may be a typo, but either way it adds insult to injury.

Predators. The Predator is so overpriced I think it may be misprinted - a Predator is more than 30 points more expensive than a Rhino (hull costs only) in exchange for +1 wound and the loss of transport capacity! Frankly, I would prefer the transport capacity outright to the +1 wound, so paying big points for the wound instead seems like a bad joke. I think there might be a typo and this unit is meant to be Toughness 8, as units with similar armor in the past look to be - but until that gets corrected or the cost gets reduced, the base hull price for a Predator is just crazy.

I'm not sure i agree about the predators, missiles, land speeders, and centurions. T7 11w is still a pretty resilient platform for 4 lascannons, and the flexability of the missile launchers is great imo, especially on devastators when you look at the rest of the SM options for anti tank and anti infantry, and how tight punts are in the average 2k list.
Land speeders with heavy flamers seem like they will be good for assaulting units you want to tie up from shooting as they can shoot, assault, probably survive combat, and force the unit to fall back and be useless that turn.
Centurions provide a lot of fire power and are pretty good with an ancient and apothecary around to punish the enemy for killing them and bringing guys back.

Multi-melta: you figure you should take it for the -4 ap instead of -3

yeah it isnt much but a -4 can be the difference between getting a save and not getting a save.

Hunter: its about a bucktwenty for rerolls to hit lascannon. not sure if its good or bad yet. i think it will depend on the target.

Camo-cloaks. i thought it added +2 instead of +1 for cover now so a 4+ scout becomes a 2+ terminator in cover against non AP weapons. thats pretty good unless the oppoant spent a butt load on special weapons or naturally come with ap mods.

imho

great assessment.

jcd386 wrote:
I'm not sure i agree about the predators, missiles, land speeders, and centurions. T7 11w is still a pretty resilient platform for 4 lascannons, and the flexability of the missile launchers is great imo, especially on devastators when you look at the rest of the SM options for anti tank and anti infantry, and how tight punts are in the average 2k list.
Land speeders with heavy flamers seem like they will be good for assaulting units you want to tie up from shooting as they can shoot, assault, probably survive combat, and force the unit to fall back and be useless that turn.
Centurions provide a lot of fire power and are pretty good with an ancient and apothecary around to punish the enemy for killing them and bringing guys back.

A Predator with four lascannon costs 202 points. Two Razorbacks, each with two lascannon, cost 230 points. For +28 points, you get nearly double the wounds, two units instead of one, the ability to transport 6 models each, and the ability to take twice as many storm bolters and hunter-killer missiles if you want (and you probably do). The Predator needs a cost decrease or a resilience increase in order to be a competitive option IMO - honestly even if it were Toughness 8 I'm not sure I would want to take it!

Desubot wrote:Camo-cloaks. i thought it added +2 instead of +1 for cover now so a 4+ scout becomes a 2+ terminator in cover against non AP weapons. thats pretty good unless the oppoant spent a butt load on special weapons or naturally come with ap mods.

The camo cloak does add +2. The problem is that cover adds +1 to normal units, so a 3+ Marine also becomes a 2+ Terminator in cover. The camo-cloak lets Scouts in cover be as resilient as Marines in cover, which is nice, but not when it makes them cost more than Marines and doesn't help them in the open!

I always figure the scouts are never meant to be in the open.

you sit them in cover on an objective and shoot the crap out of the enemy characters with snipers.

its expensive for a troop slot but mortal wounds on 6s are versatile AF

I agree on all points - except the heavy bolter is still garbo. While it's cheap - you still have to pay for the unit carrying it - and none of those are cheap. HB is a waste of a weapon IMO.

Cents for their cost should be 5 wounds - why the heck would I take a Cent with 2 LC and a CML when I can take a dread with 2 LC and 2 auto cannons for almost the same price? With plus 2 toughness +5 wounds. Ignore cover is great and all but it's not worth being 2.5 x less tough.

Agree on the preds too - I really want to take them because that autocannon is nice but it's around 200 points for that. for 100 more I can take a Storm Raven with almost twice the firepower - the ability to move and shoot with no penalty - 12 transport capacity -and a freaking flyer. Come on GW. Pred should cost no more than 150 points fully upgraded.

I agree that razorbacks are great, but 28 points adds up when you start talking about an actual army, and you are also less likely to go first with more units, so i could see predators being a good choice if you are going for a low deployment drop number.

T8 or more wounds would make them better, though.

jcd386 wrote:
I agree that razorbacks are great, but 28 points adds up when you start talking about an actual army, and you are also less likely to go first with more units, so i could see predators being a good choice if you are going for a low deployment drop number.

T8 or more wounds would make them better, though.

It also has infantry tax. not 100% a big deal, but when you are trying to spam them its going to add up once you get passed the minimum requirements.

jcd386 wrote:
I agree that razorbacks are great, but 28 points adds up when you start talking about an actual army, and you are also less likely to go first with more units, so i could see predators being a good choice if you are going for a low deployment drop number.

T8 or more wounds would make them better, though.

Deployment drops are a relevant consideration, but Razorbacks can often be "free" drops because you can deploy them with other units inside them.

I don't think the Predator is unplayable - it's just quite disappointing for the price.

 Kingsley wrote:

jcd386 wrote:
I agree that razorbacks are great, but 28 points adds up when you start talking about an actual army, and you are also less likely to go first with more units, so i could see predators being a good choice if you are going for a low deployment drop number.

T8 or more wounds would make them better, though.

Deployment drops are a relevant consideration, but Razorbacks can often be "free" drops because you can deploy them with other units inside them.

I don't think the Predator is unplayable - it's just quite disappointing for the price.

Yeah i agree they could be more durable fire what they cost. Another in game thing to think about is that it's easier to keep 3 models in range of auras than 6, and easier to have Tech marines in range of 3 than 6 etc. None of this males the Predator an auto take but i really don't think they are "ugly"

I'd argue that scouts are priced the way they are because they have the potential to be so much better at shooting from cover than tactical marines do. Tactical marines are, other than maybe one gun, not a threat over 24". That really hamstrings your ability to blast things from cover. You basically have to be shooting something that's already coming at you. Like, trust me, the 24" range limitation is something you feel keenly when you play 30k for a couple of years.
Scouts on the other hand can have their entire squad blast at units 36" away which is a HUGE difference, AND they can start the game in just about any cover on the table (assuming it's not already occupied by enemy units), not just cover in your deployment zone.
I still think scouts are great, and fairly priced, and I look forward to fielding a bunch of 'em

I don't think the Pred needs a points reduction that would be silly when compared to all the other tanks in the 8th ed. In fact it is very cheap for what it offers on a BS3+ and 4 lascannons. The problem really is that a Razorback it to cheap and needs to have a points increase. When you compare a razorback to any other unit vehicle and transport it is just to good for its cost.

I've played the Cyclone Missile Launcher twice now, and once I feel like it was the difference between life and death for my terminator squad. Hit a Trygon that popped up near them and knocked 4 wounds off of it with 1 rocket. It was a fight that lasted a couple turns, but those 4 wounds still being there would have meant the difference between a Trygon swinging back, and it dying.

It's expensive, but you don't have to pull your Cyclone bearer until you want to, so it will last longer.

broxus wrote:
I don't think the Pred needs a points reduction that would be silly when compared to all the other tanks in the 8th ed. In fact it is very cheap for what it offers on a BS3+ and 4 lascannons. The problem really is that a Razorback it to cheap and needs to have a points increase. When you compare a razorback to any other unit vehicle and transport it is just to good for its cost.

Also don't forget that a predator counts as a heavy. Do you want re-rolls? You're not going to get those by dropping a ton of dedicated transports.

Ahh this is the discussion I was looking for . Good to see feedback and consensus on things.

So if two razorbacks are seemingly > than 1 predator, how does the classic pattern land raider stack up compared to either?

broxus wrote:I don't think the Pred needs a points reduction that would be silly when compared to all the other tanks in the 8th ed. In fact it is very cheap for what it offers on a BS3+ and 4 lascannons. The problem really is that a Razorback it to cheap and needs to have a points increase. When you compare a razorback to any other unit vehicle and transport it is just to good for its cost.

How so? Compare a Razorback to a Taurox Prime, a Wave Serpent, a Rhino, many Necron vehicles... against those it stacks up. I think the Razorback is where vehicles should be and others should be brought down in price.

GrimDork wrote:Ahh this is the discussion I was looking for . Good to see feedback and consensus on things.

So if two razorbacks are seemingly > than 1 predator, how does the classic pattern land raider stack up compared to either?

The classic Land Raider is very expensive but heavily armed, with both the firepower of a las predator and a twin heavy bolter, plus the option for another storm bolter and/or a multi-melta. However, in that case you pay a lot of points for extra elements - the Machine Spriit, T8, 2+ armor, transport capacity... Ultimately, I think the Land Raider is not at all worth its points (not even close) when you think about just getting shots on the board, but it'll be much harder to silence than most other vehicles and comes with some other benefits.

For melee weapons, I think Thurnder Hammer also becomes good, for the same price of Powerfist (5pts more on a character), it got consistent 3 Damage compare to the D3 for the powerfist. Thank the Emperor I had been built some of my models with TH and some others with PF.

Is GW noticing that powefist is more worth the points in last edition than the TH and many people take the PF in place of TH, thus they want to make those models less efficient and make people buy more?

An irrevlant note: What pissed me off is I just build 3 of my Wolf Guard Terminators with combi melta and Storm Sheild 3 months ago, and now these loadouts are illegal . If I want go WYSIWYG in local tournament, I have to tear their arms off and rebuild them angry the GW is doing these dirty tricks.

Neophyte2012 wrote:
For melee weapons, I think Thurnder Hammer also becomes good, for the same price of Powerfist (5pts more on a character), it got consistent 3 Damage compare to the D3 for the powerfist. Thank the Emperor I had been built some of my models with TH and some others with PF.

Is GW noticing that powefist is more worth the points in last edition than the TH and many people take the PF in place of TH, thus they want to make those models less efficient and make people buy more?

An irrevlant note: What pissed me off is I just build 3 of my Wolf Guard Terminators with combi melta and Storm Sheild 3 months ago, and now these loadouts are illegal . If I want go WYSIWYG in local tournament, I have to tear their arms off and rebuild them angry the GW is doing these dirty tricks.

I think thunder hammers are only worth taking off they are your main anti tank and you have a good way to deliver them. Just because they are better than a power fist doesn't mean they are worth the points.

I would magentize the wolf guard to give yourself more options next time.

Predator comparison to Razorbacks is silly. Especially since you forgot to add the 55 point scout tax (minimum) onto each of those Razorbacks, since most times you will probably already be maxing out the Razorbacks you take on your other units.

To get the same firepower on razorbacks as a Predator, you need to soend 166 more points.

Or, instead, you can take a Quad Las Pred for 202, then throw an Assault Cannon Razorback in with it as it's dedicated 'transport'; 302 points gets you 4 Lascannon shots and 12 Assault Cannon Shots.

This is the List im currently thinking of running:

Batallion (+3)

Chonus - In a Predator
Primaris Lt. - MC ABR

Tacs - Flamer/CombiFlamer
Tacs - Flamer/CombiFlamer
Tacs - Flamer/CombiFlamer

Predator - Twin Las, 2 Las
Predator - Twin Las, 2 Las
Predator - Twin Las, 2 Las

Razorback: TAC
Razorback: TAC
Razorback: TAC
Razorback: TAC
Razorback: TAC
Razorback: TAC

SH Auxiliary:
Roboute Guilliman - Tenacious Survivor, Warlord (+3)

Now, its not fully optimized yet, or at 2000 points (about 1953) but the Alternative here would be Devastator Squads for my Anti Tank on the cheap, and they are only 37 points less for less than half the wounds and almost half the toughness.

(Currently thinking about dropping the special weapons from the Tacs and squeezing in another Razorback, or simply giving all the Razorbacks a Hunter Killer, and/or switching a Tac squad or two to Sniper Scouts for Commissars. The Tacs currently will be for objectives and/or a screen against Hordes, hopefully soaking a charge by standing in front so the Assault Cannons can do work.)

that list I suspect'll be obseleted the first time GW gets wind of it and plugs the loop hole allowing tanks to take DTs

 Crazyterran wrote:
Predator comparison to Razorbacks is silly. Especially since you forgot to add the 55 point scout tax (minimum) onto each of those Razorbacks, since most times you will probably already be maxing out the Razorbacks you take on your other units.

To get the same firepower on razorbacks as a Predator, you need to soend 166 more points.

Or, instead, you can take a Quad Las Pred for 202, then throw an Assault Cannon Razorback in with it as it's dedicated 'transport'; 302 points gets you 4 Lascannon shots and 12 Assault Cannon Shots.

This is the List im currently thinking of running:

Batallion (+3)

Chonus - In a Predator
Primaris Lt. - MC ABR

Tacs - Flamer/CombiFlamer
Tacs - Flamer/CombiFlamer
Tacs - Flamer/CombiFlamer

Predator - Twin Las, 2 Las
Predator - Twin Las, 2 Las
Predator - Twin Las, 2 Las

Razorback: TAC
Razorback: TAC
Razorback: TAC
Razorback: TAC
Razorback: TAC
Razorback: TAC

SH Auxiliary:
Roboute Guilliman - Tenacious Survivor, Warlord (+3)

Now, its not fully optimized yet, or at 2000 points (about 1953) but the Alternative here would be Devastator Squads for my Anti Tank on the cheap, and they are only 37 points less for less than half the wounds and almost half the toughness.

(Currently thinking about dropping the special weapons from the Tacs and squeezing in another Razorback, or simply giving all the Razorbacks a Hunter Killer, and/or switching a Tac squad or two to Sniper Scouts for Commissars. The Tacs currently will be for objectives and/or a screen against Hordes, hopefully soaking a charge by standing in front so the Assault Cannons can do work.)

Give all the Razorbacks the Missiles instead of losing the Flamers. The missiles will make for a hilarious Alpha Strike on its own. 6 missiles is gonna destroy something.

BrianDavion wrote:
that list I suspect'll be obseleted the first time GW gets wind of it and plugs the loop hole allowing tanks to take DTs

Maybe. That, or the excuse is that transports can carry spare parts, extra fuel/ammo cells/other things that are necessary for a long term deployment.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Crazyterran wrote:
Predator comparison to Razorbacks is silly. Especially since you forgot to add the 55 point scout tax (minimum) onto each of those Razorbacks, since most times you will probably already be maxing out the Razorbacks you take on your other units.

To get the same firepower on razorbacks as a Predator, you need to soend 166 more points.

Or, instead, you can take a Quad Las Pred for 202, then throw an Assault Cannon Razorback in with it as it's dedicated 'transport'; 302 points gets you 4 Lascannon shots and 12 Assault Cannon Shots.

This is the List im currently thinking of running:

Batallion (+3)

Chonus - In a Predator
Primaris Lt. - MC ABR

Tacs - Flamer/CombiFlamer
Tacs - Flamer/CombiFlamer
Tacs - Flamer/CombiFlamer

Predator - Twin Las, 2 Las
Predator - Twin Las, 2 Las
Predator - Twin Las, 2 Las

Razorback: TAC
Razorback: TAC
Razorback: TAC
Razorback: TAC
Razorback: TAC
Razorback: TAC

SH Auxiliary:
Roboute Guilliman - Tenacious Survivor, Warlord (+3)

Now, its not fully optimized yet, or at 2000 points (about 1953) but the Alternative here would be Devastator Squads for my Anti Tank on the cheap, and they are only 37 points less for less than half the wounds and almost half the toughness.

(Currently thinking about dropping the special weapons from the Tacs and squeezing in another Razorback, or simply giving all the Razorbacks a Hunter Killer, and/or switching a Tac squad or two to Sniper Scouts for Commissars. The Tacs currently will be for objectives and/or a screen against Hordes, hopefully soaking a charge by standing in front so the Assault Cannons can do work.)

Give all the Razorbacks the Missiles instead of losing the Flamers. The missiles will make for a hilarious Alpha Strike on its own. 6 missiles is gonna destroy something.

The missiles plus the lascannons have a decent chance of blowing away a knight or two in a turn... makes me all warm and fuzzy inside.