I understand the concerns from a purist standpoint, but using this argument, then the Nova and Firestorm should be dislallowed as well.
You don't understand it at all I think. Nova & Firestorms are escorts. Strike Cruisers capital ships. There is a difference. It is even given in the Nova entry that they are under scrutiny from the Inq/IN/AdMech.
I would ditch RSV's all the way.
No. RSV's were part of the ORIGINAL Space Marines list and is NOT going away. In fact, to REALLY be technical, lets talk about original game design. Before the Space Marines ever even got their own models, the intention was for the Emperor battleship and the torp version of the Dauntless to be Space Marine models before it was decided they would in fact get their own models after all. No, I'm not getting this from p.157 of the rulebook (the Space Marine models were not ready before the book went to press, as neither was the Repulsive GC). I'm not even getting that from the fact that the Emperor BB and the torp Dauntless CL have the SPACE MARINE symbol on their prows (as incidentally does the Sword escort). I got that from conversations from the game designers themselves, actual conversations at length with the people that imparted on Ray, Bob and I THEIR vision for this game and its future, NOT ours! If you don't like it, don't play it.
What is preventing me from fielding a fleet of one battle barge, three strike cruisers and 14 Firestorms? That fleet has 14 lances and is less than 1500 points! Firestorms and Novas are not going away- Firestorms in particular have been part of the SM fleet for as long as there's BEEN an SM fleet!
Not really, in Armada the option was to take pure SM escorts or RSV's. That was the first Marine list. If you ditch the Firestorm RSV option people can use them as Nova's. Just like people could/can use Dauntless light cruisers, or FW strike cruisers as marine strike cruisers. Just painted appropriate.
But, yes, one can take a Barge and only escorts, yes. That is cheesy and not fluffy. But possible indeed.
As said, there is a difference between escorts and capitals.
On this I agree with you completely. Like you, if a cheese munchkin showed up with that kind of fleet, I would pack up my models and go home. That however does NOT make it illegal.
Another point that is not being brought up in all the vitriol about SM lances is that except for the SO, not a single SM vessel has lances that exceed 30cm. Why spend that many points on SM strike cruisers with lances when for just a few more points and a different fleet list you can have a perfectly decent Lunar, or even a Gothic if one is truly a lance hog? We're still tweaking this to make it right, but "SM's can't have lances" not a valid argument in and of itself, especially if we make them rare and expensive.
That's why it is a different fleet list (Armageddon).
Space Marines can't have lances is a perfect valid reason to disallow lances to them.
No it’s not. Orks can buy lances on a battleship, earn it as a refit, have it on a Space Hulk or buy it if using the Klanz rules. It’s rare and expensive, but they can still do it (up to 45cm and 60cm, no less!) What we’re saying is that for Space Marines, it should be rare and expensive, but not entirely absent. Obviously there’s a lot of passion about this so we are addressing it (again) with the v3 rules, which are still being hashed out. Admittedly we are spending a LOT more time getting and listening to fan input to try and make this right, but that does NOT mean we are going to let one or two really passionate fans hijack what we are intending to produce here. That also means we are not going to make everyone happy.
It is background you know. Just like you mentioned about Tau should be in background (although we differ on how to use that background as well so I guess we have different backgrounds. 
, must be it.).
Our background is based on the materials we were given by Games Workshop. Believe it or not, contention doesn’t only come form the fans. When the Tau were being designed, one of the designers wanted so badly for the Kroot Warsphere to be killed off, there was almost a shouting match over the matter. To this day he hates it, ignores it and won’t mention it in any materials he produces for the game.
Still we wait views on:
- the refit we don't like.
Okay. Gone.
- the seditio opprimere which should be dropped or changed (weapon batteries) because no one likes the ship. There is no majority which likes it.
Changing the Seditio Opprimere to WB’s is pointless- it would be nothing more than a tweaked BB. We are however changing the SO to a short-range bruiser as opposed to a long-range sniper, which I agree the Space Marines should never be. On that note, three loud and passionate fans is NOT the same thing as “nobody.†You don’t see the e-mails I get, and I’m not sharing them nor debating this here.
- the 2nd shield on strike cruisers minus 1 bay
Good idea. In fact, this is such a good idea, we’re considering changing the “buy any refit†to “buy a shield†and leaving the launch bays at 2. Once again, at least half the SC’s in a fleet have to be plain-vanilla.
- your draft 'devestator' with too many bombardments
You’re right, keeping in mind that these still behave as WB’s against blast markers, AND this improvement both replaces all launch bays and only fires front. It also is NOT the same thing as torpedoes- torpedoes potentially have a much longer range than 30cm and are useful for tactics beyond merely shooting. Nonetheless, I agree the SC shouldn’t be able to out-shoot a BB in any arc so this has been reduced. BTW- I’m sure you know I didn’t call it “Devastator†in any official capacity; I just didn’t know what else to call it and knew someone had tagged the variant as such.
How about that- we agree on more than you thought! Now how about we all smile, game on and enjoy!
- Nate
