Space marine second wave rumours coming next week.

[Tacitus]

2 hours ago, Orange Knight said:

 

But Marines have plenty of other options that are great and offer ap-3.

And S12?  Lascannon are both S12 AND -3.  If all you care about is -3 then sure Las Fusils, Overcharged Plasma, and Melta gets the job done.  But people are discounting the Las Fulsil because it isn't S12 to boot.  The point of the hyothetical LasBlasters is that they're S12 AND -3, AND D(D6+1).

[HeadlessCross]

4 hours ago, ThaneOfTas said:

I'd love that, regrettably not likely to happen but it would be great.

We basically got the unit from Deathwatch already and it's fair as a whole. 

[Tacitus]

1 minute ago, TheArtilleryman said:

Hence my suggestion of folding them into one datasheet. Looks like eradicators are gravies so they wouldn’t work, but if you had one datasheet with Lascannon, desolator and hellblaster options you could still have one of each squad

Yeah, that would have been the way to go to start with, but I'd say it's too late now.  The Bespoke on Hellblasters wouldnt' work for the others.  Maybe at the beginning of an edition they can do it - plus repackage all the boxes to (New Name for Devastators): (Gun Subtype)  i.e. Devastators:Hellblasters to differentiate/link the box and the sheet.  Actual full merge and purge is likely at least a couple editions away unless GW is willing to eat a lot of costs by tossing "young to middle age" molds and making new ones.

 

I don't think they can - at this point - just bump Las Fusil to S12.  Too much abuse potential for Eliminators with Super Stealth.   I don't think they can kick the S12 man portable anti-tank/monster too much further down the road.  Maybe they can/should boost Melta to S12.  Probably the best short term option - then Lascannon have ranged stand-off S12, and Melta is the In Your Face S12 with "bonus damage" instead of "bonus range".  If they did that Dev:Las can back burner a little longer but not much putting Melta vs Las into a "fluff" or style choice.  They can kick Dev:Grav down the road -its almost a full time Frosting choice.  We already have Dev:Flame in theory and they're OK - or as OK as Flame can be until GW decides to make Flame "co-equal".  Plasma is mostly fine.  Dev:Bolt is probably fine offloading to HINTS - especially with no real room between Whatever-They-Would-Carry and Heavy Bolt Rifles.  There's just no space there.  When it comes to missile, you're probably stuck with the current Desolator models and a need to drastically reengineer them - Most Likely going back to 5/10 and reasonable pricing, dumping INDIRECT and giving them a Choose Frag/Krak instead.  The Whirlwind and Whirlwind Replacement (Most Likely an improvement to the Impulsor Bellicatus) can be the INDIRECT choice + any return of the Thunderfire Canon, but I wouldn't hold my breath for that, GW made it pretty clear they hated that thing after everyone bought it. 

[Tacitus]

6 hours ago, TheNicronomicon said:

The nerfs & price hikes were necessary, but I agree that the fixed-profile weapon options are what kills these guys. I'd love to stick a squad in an Impulsor but ye gods, the price is simply not worth it, and in the end they're a unit that is either good at their one, limited job or completely useless in any given matchup. If they could rework the weapon profile they might be useful again. Maybe one build option is a split profile without indirect at all, and the other weapon has indirect but is more limited in its applications.

 

Or they lock them in a Space Hulk with the Suppressors and fling them into a sun.

The problem with sticking them in an Impulsor is you immediate give away a bunch of their value.  Impulsors only allow you to select one gun per model, and Desolators are datasheeted with two guns i.e. you'd get either the Missiles, or the Bomblet Launchers.

[jaxom]

On 1/21/2025 at 8:24 AM, Orange Knight said:

Technically, but they all have the same profiles across all factions. The only difference is the rolls to hit which reflect the model.

 

Unless named differently, and modelled differently, in most cases there is uniformity. The only cases that aren't so turned out to be printing errors. I recall the Multi Meltas on the Gladiator being Str10 for a time...

 

SoB Boltguns and Guard are 1 Attack, Rapid Fire 1 and Marine Boltguns are 2 Attacks. I think that's probably the best of example of the same weapon being different (excluding WS/BS)? I do agree that all Astartes boltguns should be a bit better in rules because of their larger size. Personally, I'd make them Strength 5; I just feel like Marine boltguns should be wounding Orks on a 4+. Then up the Heavy Bolter to Str6, wounding "normal" physiologies (T3) on a 2+.

 

On 1/21/2025 at 10:04 PM, Tacitus said:

Oh I suspect we already have our new "Tacticals" but the old ones haven't been removed yet - probably for some second level issue like backstock or the kit is necessary for some bespoke unit in a divergent chapter etc - so there's no need to remove them until that Tactical + Upgrade kit (Grey Hunters?  something else?) is updated to the Intercessor + kit.

 

Devs are the one they probably haven't figured out yet.  They started with Hellblasters, Infernusators, and SORT OF Erads and HINTS - but realistically while Plasma is done, for a "real" replacement of Devs you're probably also looking for Las, Melta, and missile launchers on Tacticus.  And figuring out how to prevent 3 Hellblasters, 3 Lasblasters, 3 Missileblasters, etc. 

On 1/22/2025 at 8:54 AM, Karhedron said:

So far we have Plasma covered by Hellblasters, Melta covered by Eradicators and Missiles covered by Desolators. I would like to see a Lascannon squad for long-ranged anti-tank work and maybe a Grav squad too. Then that is all the Devastator weapon types covered.

 

I don't really see any value in a Primaris Devastator squad because we don't pay for upgrades anymore which means GW would have to try to balance the different weapon options against each other (with predictable results). Now if the meta favours plasma, they can nudge up the points on Hellblasters without affecting other specialist weapon squads.

 

I also think the Primaris weapon-specialist squads are the replacements. I think the Hellblasters are not only a replacement for Plasma Cannons (see spoiler), but they and HINTs collectively are a replacement for Heavy Bolters. Plasma is no longer the light vehicle killer it was, but is a great medium infantry killer (I'd call T4 2W 3+ medium infantry at this point) which is one of the old uses of Heavy Bolters. HINTs take care of the other use: clearing mass infantry.

 

I think Eradicators are the Melta replacement. It's not as good of a transition because of the 3/6 squad size. A lascannon equivalent is the only one missing. If there's a new Tacticus heavy weapon squad (as @Indy Techwisp mentioned from the Cherub preview), I expect it will be lascannons; however, not amazing lascannons, but ones that require expending the Cherub if you want to get rid of a tank in one turn of shooting. Grav weapons seem to me like Centurions: GW trying in new things during a specific time period, but not really congruent with their current direction. That's why I don't think we'll see grav-weapon marines; even though I used to think so when they released Tor Taragon.

 

Spoiler

The box art and many of the webstore images use the "heavy" build variant. The Plasma Incinerator is larger than a Plasma Gun, and more like a leaner Plasma Cannon; helped by the presence of the backpack battery and wires. I think it's on purpose.

 

On 1/21/2025 at 10:42 PM, Indy Techwisp said:

 

Regarding Devastators, there's a really simple solution GW could use, but it wouldn't be well liked...

 

Also not well-like idea: retcon what Devastator means, like they soft-did in 8th. Tactical = Battle Line, Assault = Close Support, Devastator = Heavy Support. So one would have a Devastator Squad with an Eradicator loadout, a Tactical Squad with an Infiltrator loadout, etc.

 

I think the multiple weapon load out could work in 10th edition, I just don't think it would be popular outside of a niche of Space Marine collectors. I don't think people who entered the game since 8th edition or who play in tournaments would find it attractive compared to the clear purpose of the other mono-weapon squads. I don't think we'll see an infantry kit with 20 weapon bits for 5 models. Two per model seems to be GW's limit. So hey, maybe I'll be wrong an a new Tacticus heavy weapon squad will have a Grav option and a Las option... actually, if there's a Cherub, that could work really well as both those weapon types could fit a "expend Cherub for effect" like the old Grav-lensing strat.

 

 

On 1/22/2025 at 11:49 AM, Indy Techwisp said:

Moving onto a different part of this topic:

 

We're rumoured to be getting some new characters with this whole thing.

 

While Valrak has said whom he think Salamanders and Imperial Fists are getting, the remaining 3 are up in the air.

Also, of the 3, the one with the least info is the Ravenguard HQ.

 

So, who do we think the "probably terminator" HQ for Iron Hands is?
Who do we think the "on Hoverbike" HQ for White Scars is?

And who do we think the Ravenguard HQ is and what kind of character will they end up being?

 

Stronos for Iron Hands is low hanging fruit to be picked. I think the White Scars character will either be someone new, or Ochir Khan of the 6th Brotherhood. The 6th Brotherhood uses a lot of tanks (antigrav-units to go with an anti-grav bike) and the 6th Company of a Chapter is also use the Bike Reserve Company (to go with an anti-grav bike). I think Raven Guard will be Shadow Captain Aethon Shann of the 2nd Company. Last we heard of him, he was trying to get an RG doctrine update allowing him to field the entire 2nd Company as a Vanguard force; so he's a special character that could increase OC of Phobos troops rather than AIwJP.

 

On 1/23/2025 at 7:15 PM, WrathOfTheLion said:

Just skimmed through some of the thread, I do have an opinion on Devastators. They've recreated all of the classic marine squads pretty faithfully at this point, besides the tactical squad and devastators. I personally think we'll just see a devastator squad at some point, probably in the 11E started with redone intercessors to cover the remaining bits of what is missing from the tactical squad.

 

As for the kits matching the loadouts, I think GW wants to avoid a few things, while perhaps taking it to an extreme at times. They want to avoid situations like buying four Havoc squads to get all reaper chaincannons, so there's that aspect to it. On the other hand, they also want to be the comprehensive seller for their line, they don't want people to have to leave them for getting the items they need. So in the end there are multiple motivations of theirs, and some combo of them weighted in various ways adds up to the policy.

 

I really want an updated Intercessor sprue with at least some special  weapons, maybe some heavy weapons. Ironically, I probably wouldn't buy it, but I want it to exist. I think that it can be something like the flipside of Sternguard. Sternguard can choose either Heavy Bolter or Heavy Flamer; Intercessors can choose either Melta-Rifle or Las-talon.

 

18 hours ago, Tacitus said:

I'm not talking about Desolators, Hellblasters, and Eradicators.  Sure the Hellblasters and Desolators would probably get tagged - I'm talking about the Tacticus Melta guys, and the Tacticus Grav guns, and the Tacticus Las guys and on and on.  The hypothetical split-outs turning the traditional Dev Squad into something like 7 datasheets that are all basically the same thing, without the rule of three in the other rule of three. (3 max Datasheet with 3 slots to use)

 

I don't think this is as skewed an issue due to balancing points and bodies on the table. However, I also think it's unlikely that there will be a Primaris/Tacticus Devastator replacement which is anything other than a squad of 5 with the option being choose one of two weapons (grav or las, as I wrote earlier); if there is such a replacement at all beyond Hellblasters and Desolators.

  

On 1/17/2025 at 1:44 PM, Dr. Clock said:

Re: VGV - not unlikely they'll get the Sang Guard and Bladeguard and Sword Brethren and Inner Circle treatment and go to 3/6 instead of 5/10... Which I'd honestly be okay with, especially if they get the extra W that Primaris Veterans and Chosen have accrued.

On 1/19/2025 at 5:35 PM, The Praetorian of Inwit said:

Vanguard Veterans are not redundant. Hopefully they do as they did with Terminators and Sternguard and just give them a nice glow up. Nothing stupid like certain rocket launcher carrying marines.

On 1/20/2025 at 10:11 AM, Tacitus said:

Sadly I expect Van-Vets to not regain any of those options.  They're going to stay Pistol + Heirloom weapon.  The best we can hope for is an improvement to "Heirloom Weapon". 

 

I think they'll get the Sternguard/Tactical Squad treatment. What I mean by that is the unit's look and numbers will be based on the veteran unit and it's options will be based on the old regular unit. So Vanguard Vets would theoretically be 5-10 Marines, with one weapon upgrade per five, and a choice between two basic weapons. One of the basic weapons will  be a better version of the standard unit. I expect it to be the current Melee Heirloom Weapon with Devastating Wounds added. Then the other is more specialized; perhaps Thunder Hammers with Anti-Tank/Anti-Monster 4+ and Devastating Wounds. I think the squad will either get pistols or shields, but not both, simply due to space on the sprue. I think the two special options on the sprue would be an Eviscerator and Twin Lightning Claws. And some options for the Sergeant, as one might expect.

 

On 1/17/2025 at 1:44 PM, Dr. Clock said:

I'd be okay if both options get multi-mode profiles, that just seems less likely to me than that becoming the 'special feature of claws' to make up for the -1 W. On spec I'd say lightning claw sweep could be '6A WS3+ S4 AP-2 Dmg1 Twin-linked' (Aka slaughter anything 1W), then make the smash '4A WS3+ S6 AP-2 Dmg2 Twin-linked' (also slaughter many MeQ)... At that point I'd probably put two in a unit just to make sure that I can clear 1 and 2W trash pretty cleanly on top of the hammer swings for some vehicle/monster coverage. At that point Thunder hammers maybe need a slight shine to S9 so they can bash doors off basic transports. Adding a smash attack for them at S:12 is a cool idea, but we need to remember that Oath giving +1 to wound could see them then wounding landraiders on 3s, which starts to feel a bit out of hand for a one-handed hammer swing honestly.

 

In order of preference for me to warant including at least some LCs in a unit:

 

1: Just make lightning claws better by giving them damage 2.

2: Give lightning claws slash/stab 1/2 damage modes.

3: Combine both weapon profiles into a single strike/sweep for the whole unit (pretty unlikely tbf)

4: Give both weapons dual attack modes

 

Cheers,

 

The Good Doctor.

 

Rules change, but I think the feel of the weapons should that Thunder Hammers are absolutely overkill for hitting a T3-5 model, but they don't get a lot of attacks and can be tar-pitted; while they need to roll better than average to kill a big tank/monster in one round of attacks with three Terminators, roll slightly better than average to kill a big tank/monster in one round of attacks with five Terminators, and roll slightly worse than average to kill a to kill a big tank/monster in one round of attacks with seven Terminators.

 

On 1/17/2025 at 2:06 PM, HeadlessCross said:

Y'all are trying to make the Claws better vs MEQ where they were already fine into that. Killing MEQ or chaff isn't the problem. The problem is how much do you need more anti-infantry melee?

 

I think will vary based on what sort of army styles are popular at any given moment. At the moment, I agree. Marines have good core of anti-infantry usually by default when building an army nowadays.

 

On 1/19/2025 at 6:19 PM, TheArtilleryman said:

Codex compliant chapters shouldn’t really have any unique units as that’s the purview of the divergents.
 

What they should have is additional rules that heavily encourage and reward a play style in keeping with the theme of each chapter. Whether that is changing certain units to be battleline and increasing their OC stat e.g. Bikes and ATVs for White Scars, Infernus squads for Salamanders etc. or some improvements in specific weaponry. We have some of this with the existing detachments, but it would be good to see them expand on this further.

 

I liked the special rules from one of the older editions where you could build your own chapter by choosing rules from a couple of different lists. Something like that would be cool to bring back.

On 1/19/2025 at 11:07 PM, TheNicronomicon said:

Oh, I couldn't disagree more. Give White Scars a biker unit, for example, that is to the outrider kit as the hounds of morkai are to the Reivers kit. Or Raven Guard and jump pack intercessors. These palette-swap units could be customized with the Scars upgrade kit or just given the right paint job. They don't need full resculpts like more divergent chapters do, I agree, but it does give the chance to distinguish each of the first founding chapters and make them distinct without devoting even more of the product pipeline to Marines.

 

So far I like what was done recently with changing the OC of specific units when a Chapter character is taken. I think it does encourage and reward a specific composition and play style while being compatible with the detachment types, but not tied to them.  An Ironstorm force with a lot of tanks, plus Khan and Outriders for grabbing objectives, for example. I feel like the build-your-own rules have historically had no effective negatives. I'd rather keep the variation focused on Special Characters plus Counts-As, and Detachment. Just opinion, nothing objective.

 

I've homebrewed a number of such "palette swap" unique units. I like them, I think they're cool, and I do think they can have a place in Codex-Compliant Chapter. I also think they add more to Marines as a narrative element and should occupy a similar space to Legacy units. If the codex culled a number existing units, then maybe they'd have place. I don't like that, but it's me trying to see it from a GW tournament-influenced perspective.

 

On 1/19/2025 at 5:35 PM, The Praetorian of Inwit said:

A proper mpk for Outriders would be nice. 

 

Agreed, though at this point I expect it will only happen once the mold for the Indomitus bikers needs to be replaced. Ditto for Suppressors... and that might be awhile if my gut feeling on Suppressor sales is correct.

 

 

On 1/20/2025 at 12:48 PM, Orange Knight said:

Aggressors are better designed as a unit for a tabletop wargame, where as Terminators work better as a unit for a skirmish game.

 

I'm a broken record at this point with how many times I repeat this, but I can't believe they didn't take the opportunity to shake-up the wargear on the refreshed Terminators. In my opinion the entire squad should have either Assault Cannons or Missile Launchers - actually make them shooty. We already have entire units of plasma guns running around.

 

For further reading and discussion of Terminators for those interesting; Orange Knight perhaps was too humble to post the link to one's own previous topic:

 

Edited January 25 by jaxom
Added link

[Tacitus]

5 hours ago, jaxom said:

 

SoB Boltguns and Guard are 1 Attack, Rapid Fire 1 and Marine Boltguns are 2 Attacks. I think that's probably the best of example of the same weapon being different (excluding WS/BS)? I do agree that all Astartes boltguns should be a bit better in rules because of their larger size. Personally, I'd make them Strength 5; I just feel like Marine boltguns should be wounding Orks on a 4+. Then up the Heavy Bolter to Str6, wounding "normal" physiologies (T3) on a 2+.

 

I actually like them wounding Boyz on a 5+.  It gives Orks a different kind of durability.  Its not the same cookie cutter template.  They should get their -1 AP back though.

 

Quote

I really want an updated Intercessor sprue with at least some special  weapons, maybe some heavy weapons. Ironically, I probably wouldn't buy it, but I want it to exist. I think that it can be something like the flipside of Sternguard. Sternguard can choose either Heavy Bolter or Heavy Flamer; Intercessors can choose either Melta-Rifle or Las-talon.

I'm not sure that's the way they're going.  They seem to be doing mostly uniform weapons and (were?) going away from the 7 Basics, 2 Special/Heavy, Sgt Custom recipe.  JPAI didn't get Eviscerators.  They didn't get any bespoke to help them vs Monsters or Tanks either which they should have - a Meltabomb bespoke maybe.  I suspect they are/were going mono weapon to help dice pools.  Theyre all the same, or functionally the same.  Take a couple off color dice for the Multi-Melta, then when you roll to wound they're all the same. 

Quote

Rules change, but I think the feel of the weapons should that Thunder Hammers are absolutely overkill for hitting a T3-5 model, but they don't get a lot of attacks and can be tar-pitted; 

Absolutely.  I think Thunderhammers should rapidly lose efficiency against "chaff".  I think Lightning Claws should also not be efficient against "chaff".  I think Lightning Claws should ginsu MEQ.  I think Thunderhammers should splatter monsters and tanks but I think they need two profiles for that based on the profile of the monsters and tanks - or give them Anti-Vehicle/Monster X+ and get rid of Dev Wounds.   But I'm pretty sure this is just GW and their normal blind spots.

[Medjugorje]

On 1/19/2025 at 3:30 PM, Tacitus said:

You're kind of making their point for them.  If you can compare Vanguard Vets to a regular old Assault Squad Vanguard Vets aren't redundant, they're pitiful.  Vanguard Vets are the Elite Assault Squad like Sternguard are the elite Tactical Squad.

old post - but I AGREE SOOOOO MUCH. I hope GW know how the majority see THAT way

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

On 1/24/2025 at 7:17 PM, Tacitus said:

And S12?  Lascannon are both S12 AND -3.  If all you care about is -3 then sure Las Fusils, Overcharged Plasma, and Melta gets the job done.  But people are discounting the Las Fulsil because it isn't S12 to boot.  The point of the hyothetical LasBlasters is that they're S12 AND -3, AND D(D6+1).

OOM now mitigates the lack of S12 now.

i mean sure S12 now does even better, but fusils are now basically as good into armor as lascannons were before the OOM rework.

[Tacitus]

20 minutes ago, Inquisitor_Lensoven said:

OOM now mitigates the lack of S12 now.

i mean sure S12 now does even better, but fusils are now basically as good into armor as lascannons were before the OOM rework.

Not everything is into the OOM target, Fusils are still behind Lascannon.  Fusils wound T12 on 5's - 4's if OOM,  Lascannon wound T12 on 4's, 3's if OOM.

[DemonGSides]

Las Fusils are a poor answer to "I want at least 4 Lascannons".

Edited January 26 by DemonGSides

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

30 minutes ago, Tacitus said:

Not everything is into the OOM target, Fusils are still behind Lascannon.  Fusils wound T12 on 5's - 4's if OOM,  Lascannon wound T12 on 4's, 3's if OOM.

Great, things you’d want to make OOM target are likely the things you’d want lascannons for.

shoot the OOM target with fusils, and other big stuff with lascannons/talons.

 

like i said, all things being equal lascannons are still better, but fusils into OOM target help to make up the slack if you’re struggling to find lascannons to fit into the army.

Edited January 26 by Inquisitor_Lensoven

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

Just checked the previous codex and I’ve noticed las talons went from S9 to S10 between editions, so i have a theory now that by 12th las talons will be S12, and lascannons will be replaced by las talons to the point any first born vehicles like the LR will just have the cannon replaced by talons on the datasheet.

 

[Tacitus]

2 hours ago, Inquisitor_Lensoven said:

Just checked the previous codex and I’ve noticed las talons went from S9 to S10 between editions, so i have a theory now that by 12th las talons will be S12, and lascannons will be replaced by las talons to the point any first born vehicles like the LR will just have the cannon replaced by talons on the datasheet.

 

the LR has "bespoke" Lascannons.  They're called Godhammer Lascannons.   And yeah, I wouldn't be surprised to see them co exist in the next edition, I think I even said so, just that they probably can't coexist now because Super Stealth Eliminators might be a little abusive.  I think if they wanted to do something this edition, its far more likely to bump Melta to S12 - and long run I think it should be.  Melta and Las should be two different flavors down parallel roads to the same destination.  Lascannons have bonus rage, Melta has bonus damage but they still crack open T12 about the same. a

 

Edit to Add:  This also should go a long way for Sisters who don't have Lascannons. 

Edited January 26 by Tacitus

[DemonGSides]

3 hours ago, Inquisitor_Lensoven said:

Just checked the previous codex and I’ve noticed las talons went from S9 to S10 between editions, so i have a theory now that by 12th las talons will be S12, and lascannons will be replaced by las talons to the point any first born vehicles like the LR will just have the cannon replaced by talons on the datasheet.

 

I doubt it. A las talon is different from a lascannon. They even look a bit different. 

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

1 hour ago, DemonGSides said:

 

I doubt it. A las talon is different from a lascannon. They even look a bit different. 

Sure, and yet that won’t stop them once they’ve deleted all the first born datasheets that aren’t iconic and loved enough.