Very nice. A logical and professional-looking list. I like that it's clearly not a 'my force should be best' army - the rules if anything putting them at a disadvantage against most armies, especially the Thin Blue Line (on that note, shouldn't it be the Thin Black Line?) which is likely to grant them the penalties of going first without the advantage.
Thank you very much for your comments. They are greatly appreciated. I am glad my efforts, specifically to make a balanced list, have not gone unnoticed. As far as "Thin Blue Line", this is kind of a running joke/tradition born from the Adeptus Arbites Garrison on Yahoo Groups. So it stays - but feel free to call it black if you want...
Generic Combat and Patrol teams are simple enough and look good. They're better than guard grenadiers due to their small arms and Disciplined Fire (though admittedly that's a minor thing), but not catastrophically so, especially when the guard pull out an extra assault weapon and 'proper' heavy weapons.
Your comment on Disciplined Fire keys in on one of the things I am most proud of with this list. Is it an advantage? Sure. Is it huge? No. Does it let the Arbites play using just slightly different strategies than other armies? Definitely. That is what I tried to do with many of the rules I created (including things like Thin Blue Line and Shield Wall Formation). Rules that add character, without being overpowered, are what I strive for.
I'd personally comment that plasma guns are generally worth more than the other weapon options (+5 relative seems common), especially with the changes to rapid fire.
I will take this under advisement, but so far I have not seen a need for such a difference, as Arbites forces prize Meltas quite highly due to a lack of overall Anti-Armour, and heavy bolters and grenade launchers are very versatile, so there doesn't seem to be anything pushing the plasma gun over the top of the others in either effectiveness or desirability as far as how the army actually plays.
Equally, whilst choke grenades are nice, I'd personally just use them to replace frags - the two weapons are similar enough that the choice is somewhat pointless against 90% of targets. There's no rule that says grenade launchers must have a frag option, and this is just simpler.
Frags wound T2/T3 models easier than Choke Grenades do, so they have their uses (against swarms in particular). Also, the Arbites Grenade Launcher has always traditionally fired Frag & Krak, and often had access to other rounds.
I can't, however, convince myself that the response team is worth it. Yes, all right, deep strike and outflank, but you can only ever use one of those at once and most people only pay a point or so for that ability. I'm not knocking shock grenades per se, but given that this unit really doesn't want to get too close (might a webber option make sense?), if you're ever in a position to use them it's not a good thing for you, so I'm not sure they're worth that much in this case. (By comparison, they're ideal on a suppression squad). All right, you can take umpty-ump assault weapons, but generally devastator-analogues make the heavy weapons more expensive, not the dudes holding them.
This I find interesting. One of my playtesters has keyed in on Response Teams as his favorites, enjoying their outflank ability and their broad range of options (including the hot-shot lasguns), which allow him to tailor them to his opponent. I personally like them for the Units Inbound rule, which (coupled with the Call For Backup rule) allows me to get them where and when I want them more often than not.
Not sure why the eagle is rear armour 11; even front-line gunships (like the vendetta) arent.
Stormravens are 12 all-round, and as the Arbites are often mentioned as being "deliberately better equipped than the Imperial Guard and PDF forces", I chose to compromise by putting the Eagle firmly in between the two.
The only other unit I might suggest is something akin to a 'breaching force' - designed to go into an occupied hab-block and clear it. Suppression squads are a riot screen, but HRT/SWAT building clearance is a different matter. I guess that's the response team with riot shields?
Yes, Response Teams are intended to fill this role. Back in my (much larger, more fluffy, but less streamlined and balanced) 5th Edition Arbites Codex, I had a separate entry for SWAT Teams, but they were merged with the response team for this version.
The one thing I don't get the riot shield rules - if it's a gunfire shield, +1 armour save vs range seems to make more sense than vs melee; stealth really isn't that good a rule for a close-quarter unit already in carapace plate. For that matter, if you want to steal an existing rule, consider the Badab War rule for siege mantlets - essentially what these are - reroll saves vs ranged attacks but can't run or use additional ccw.
Equally, Horus Heresy book 1 has Hardened Armour for boarding/breaching marines - designed to give protection when storming close quarter environments, which gives improved protection against blast and template weapons specifically.
Riot shields are a recent addition (v 1.5) and are still being tested. What I don't want is to just have them add +1 to the Armour Save overall, as that just makes them "Power Armour" clones. We already have quite enough Power Armour in the game. Giving them Stealth allows them a chance to save when their Armour Save is negated and they aren't in cover, without making it a true Invulnerable Save (as flamer-type and other cover-ignoring weapons get by), and also makes cover just a bit more effective. There is no cover mechanic in close combat, so I figured the +1 save there allows them to save against a few more weapons (the AP4 types like Power Mauls) without giving them an Invulnerable Save.