Now the Codex is upon us and even those Astartes fans that don't have their codex yet already know almost everything in it thanks to a constant stream of leaked information from 40K Radio. Several posters on BoLS who received their books early have confirmed that 40K Radio did indeed have an accurate copy of the 6th Edition C:SM.
My copy is still in the mail, but we've gotten enough information to see how much of my wishlist I got.
From Part I
Agemman and the Ultramarines 1st Company: Not Granted
It doesn't look like we Ultramarine players will be getting an Agemman model, nor will we be taking Sternguard as troops. I didn't have my heart set on this, though, so I'm not particularly disappointed. I can still hope that an Ultramarines Supplement might give us something along these lines, possibly by labeling the Sternguard as Tyrannic War Veterans.
GW gave us an amazing kit with the Sternguard |
The High Cost of Relic Blades: Partially Granted
I loved relic blades in 5th Edition, but their effectual downgrade to AP3 made their 30 point cost unreasonable. I suggested that HQ relic blades be priced closer to 20 points. Apparently relic blades for HQs will now be 25 points. However, the Teeth of Terra relic (a chainsword with relic blade stats plus Rampage and Strikedown) and the Burning Blade relic (a power sword with the Blind rule and plasma weapon stats, complete with a nasty version of Gets Hot) are actually a lot more tempting. That and both weapons sound like a blast to model.
More Tanks, Please: Not Quite Granted
I would have liked a mid-sized Space Marine tank. While Forge World has since made one for the Horus Heresy, GW will only be giving us the anti-flyer Hunter and Stalker tanks. While I expect these tanks to be the bane of flyers everywhere, our Cabal makes little use of flyers right now. I'll pass on this tank until our micro-meta catches up.
Not quite what I wanted |
Give Me a Reason to Take a Whirlwind: Not Granted
Stronger weapons, multiple blasts, anti-air capability; something to justify the presence of this tank in my army. Sorry, a 20 point deduction isn't enough to encourage me to fill a Heavy Support Slot with one. If I could have a squadron of three it would be a very different story.
I'd Like to take a Thunderfire Cannon, But...: Not Granted
My original wishlist didn't take into account the improved durability of 6th Edition artillery, leading me to suggest that a Thunderfire version of the Vindicator be produced. I'd still love to see a Thunderfire Vindicator, but the current Thunderfire Cannon is a lot better than it had been under the previous artillery rules. Apparently it also gained barrage in this edition. At the same time, I refuse to buy a $56 resin model of the cannon. I'll buy it the day it comes out in plastic, though.
From Part II
Reasonably Priced Devastators: Granted
Vanilla Devastators have been lacking from many gaming tables due to their absurd price. In addition to the two point per model price drop that Tactical Marines and Scouts will also receive, Devastator weapons are now supposed to cost about as much as Dark Angels Devastator weapons. The Dark Angels' weapons are reasonably priced, which makes this C:SM player very happy.
I bought several boxes over the past couple years hoping they would come down in price |
Venerable Dreadnoughts: Granted In a Different Way
I would have loved the ability to regenerate hull points on Venerable Dreadnoughts. However, I was willing to settle on a points reduction; I'm simply not going to pay a 60 point premium under 6th Edition's hull point rules. Now it's supposed to be a 25 point upgrade to make a standard Dreadnought (which will get a 5 point reduction) into a Venerable. BS5, WS5, and the ability to force a re-roll on the damage table is definitely worth 25 points in my opinion.
Sniper Scout Ballistic Skill: Not Granted
Apparently Scouts will be getting a 2 point per model reduction. Sniper rifles will be a 1 point upgrade but camo cloaks (which I almost always put on Snipers) will be 1 point cheaper. Other than that, Scouts haven't seen any changes.
From Part III
More Dakka: Granted (depending on Chapter)
I asked for more firepower and it looks like I got it in the form of the Ultramarine Combat Doctrines. During the turn in which the Tactical Doctrine is applied, Tactical Marines re-roll fails to hit while other units re-roll ones. The Devastator Doctrine gives Devastator Squads one turn of Relentless while allowing other units to re-roll snapshots and overwatch. Imperial Fist players get it in the form of the army-wide Bolter Drill; allowing them to re-roll ones with bolter-type weapons.
Sternguard Heavy Bolters: Not Granted
It doesn't sound like there are any changes to Sternguard heavy bolters. Or to heavy bolters in general. If GW was indeed play testing new rules for heavy bolters, they decided against using them. That's a shame; I would have liked to have more mobile heavy bolters.
Supporting Fire: Not Granted
Other than some points modifications and a few tweaks along the lines of C:DA, Tactical Marines haven't gained any new abilities.
Shooty Terminators: Not Granted
Shooty Terminators' assault cannons and cyclone missile launchers will be getting a much needed 10 point cost reduction. Other than this, there is no change. And with the exception of a 5 point increase for models equipped with thunder hammers and storm shields, Assault Terminators didn't see any changes either. As cool as it would be, there won't be any way to mix Shooty and Assault Terminators.
As a side note, I'm not exactly happy that thunder hammers and storm shields had a points increase, but I had accepted long ago that it would probably happen. The change in wound allocation rules made storm shields so useful that it only made sense to increase their cost.
Next time I'll cover things I didn't even think to ask for but am happy to have anyway.
No comments:
Post a Comment