Space Marines - Redesign/Rules Development

[Sigoroth]

Sigoroth, I think you're way off here.

Well you're wrong.

First, um, the Nova wouldn't exist at all then, if what you say is true.  It would have been blown up, along with all the chapters that don't follow the codex astartes, which means that Space Wolves and BTs would have long ago been exterminated, along with the Dark Angels.  Since, this didn't happen, one must assume that the prohibition was not absolute.  Bluntly, though, I suspect that particular weapons were probably never even mentioned.

The Imperium is terrified of the prospect of the SM having a fleet of ships capable of defeating the IN in protracted battle. The lance is solely and purely an anti-ship weapon. Why would the IN give the SM the very tool necessary to defeat them? There is zero support for this stance. What possible reason is there to give SMs lances? Is there even one single reason? No. On the other hand the only reason not to is that there is no way that the IN would allow it ever. Well, I can see a case for lances on SM ships.

IN, if you stop and think about it, would be concerend about any armed space marine escort, as they are universally too small to support landings.  It just mentions it in the Nova entry, and implies it again in the Hunter entry, as the Hunter is clearly meant to be an equivalent of the IN cobra, just as Nova is a firestorm and Gladius is a sword.  (It's vaguely implied that Eisenstein is a Gladius when Gerro compares it to the 'new' Sword class)

Escorts are universally too small to pose a threat to IN dominance. That's why they're allowed, though rare. Mostly, the Nova would be used for harrying rebellious or pirate escorts.

And if you never caught the rather tongue in cheek naming scheme before now, well...

Of course I'm aware of the naming scheme, though "Hunter" is a bit off. It should have been Viper or Adder or Taipan or something. Either way, this is irrelevant.

[BaronIveagh]

The Imperium is terrified of the prospect of the SM having a fleet of ships capable of defeating the IN in protracted battle. The lance is solely and purely an anti-ship weapon. Why would the IN give the SM the very tool necessary to defeat them? There is zero support for this stance. What possible reason is there to give SMs lances? Is there even one single reason? No. On the other hand the only reason not to is that there is no way that the IN would allow it ever. Well, I can see a case for lances on SM ships.

Once again: you are totally forgetting that the IN fleet at the time of the writing of Codex Astartes was not the IN fleet used 'today'.  The Inq DOES NOT go around telling SM chapters 'Well, IN got simpler/weaker again, so you have to throw out your priceless relics from your founding.'  One thing that Space Marines do take very seriously, in any and all fluff I have ever read, is the traditions of their chapters.

And, frankly, as far as 'things space marines can get away with' Huron Blackheart, as chapter master of the Astral Claws, seized an entire sector in the Maelstrom zone as his own personal fief and no one cared.  It was only when he didn't tithe that anyone moved against him, triggering the Badab War http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Badab_War.

One might cynically state that as long as they paid their taxes on it, a space marine chapter could have their own private kingdoms.  (Oh,wait...)

Escorts are universally too small to pose a threat to IN dominance. That's why they're allowed, though rare. Mostly, the Nova would be used for harrying rebellious or pirate escorts.

However, once again, it means that the ban isn't on lances themselves. 

[Admiral_d_Artagnan]

Once again: you are totally forgetting that the IN fleet at the time of the writing of Codex Astartes was not the IN fleet used 'today'.  The Inq DOES NOT go around telling SM chapters 'Well, IN got simpler/weaker again, so you have to throw out your priceless relics from your founding.'  One thing that Space Marines do take very seriously, in any and all fluff I have ever read, is the traditions of their chapters.

What's tradition got to do with the Chapters created after the Horus Heresy and lance bearing ships?

However, once again, it means that the ban isn't on lances themselves. 

It is in a sense a ban on lances but in the sense of capital ships. They are permitted on escorts which can never threaten the IN.

[horizon]

The Imperium is terrified of the prospect of the SM having a fleet of ships capable of defeating the IN in protracted battle. The lance is solely and purely an anti-ship weapon. Why would the IN give the SM the very tool necessary to defeat them? There is zero support for this stance. What possible reason is there to give SMs lances? Is there even one single reason? No. On the other hand the only reason not to is that there is no way that the IN would allow it ever. Well, I can see a case for lances on SM ships.

Once again: you are totally forgetting that the IN fleet at the time of the writing of Codex Astartes was not the IN fleet used 'today'.  The Inq DOES NOT go around telling SM chapters 'Well, IN got simpler/weaker again, so you have to throw out your priceless relics from your founding.'  One thing that Space Marines do take very seriously, in any and all fluff I have ever read, is the traditions of their chapters.

Eh, you give even more reason for the Imperium to deny Marine lances. A Lance is a lance. And the old IN (Imperial Army) (Chaos models) or the new Imperial vessels: they are equally vulnerable to a lance. Thus even the doctrine and fleet changed for the Imperial Navy, the prospect of facing enemy fire did not. And to keep it all in check the Marines would still not get a lance.
To add: That precious prow does not mean anything to a lance!!! Thus more reason to deny lances to Marines in case of troubles!!!

[BaronIveagh]

What's tradition got to do with the Chapters created after the Horus Heresy and lance bearing ships?

Actually, it would be for any chapter founded pre-M37 when IN changed over the the Lunar-style ships from the Murder.  Which would be a fair chunk of them

It is in a sense a ban on lances but in the sense of capital ships. They are permitted on escorts which can never threaten the IN.

It's pretty clear in the text that the ban is on ships specifically designed to hunt other ships.  It's not about strike cruisers or any other ship designed to land troops (as, even with a lance, a strike cruiser is still primarily a fire support/close air support platform.) and, further, a precision weapon like a lance, for purposes of fire support, is much superior to 'flattening the city with a BC' since bunkers and other hardened structures are likely to survive a BC, but for a decapitation strike against a hardened bunker, a lance is much superior.  (see Cain's Last Stand for just such a decapitation lance strike against a planetary PDF HQ.)  Since Space Marines are a scalpel, not the sledgehammer of the IG.

Further, if you blow a city to rubble, it makes it harder, not easier, to fight in.  Additionally, it damages infrastructure that the IG follow up landings might want intact.  Like airfields and space ports.  

Eh, you give even more reason for the Imperium to deny Marine lances. A Lance is a lance. And the old IN (Imperial Army) (Chaos models) or the new Imperial vessels: they are equally vulnerable to a lance. Thus even the doctrine and fleet changed for the Imperial Navy, the prospect of facing enemy fire did not. And to keep it all in check the Marines would still not get a lance.
To add: That precious prow does not mean anything to a lance!!! Thus more reason to deny lances to Marines in case of troubles!!!

Except, Horizon 'that precious prow' didn't exist at the time the Codex was written.  The armored prow was a later invention (See fluff for GCs).  And, no, a single 30cm str 2 lance and a str 4 wb does not equal a str 2 lance and a str 14 wb on a faster and more durable hull (though not as heavily armored), since at the time the codex was written, the SC's navy equivalent would have been the Slaughter.  Same with the Desolator, which can, quite easily, kill a battle barge without ever taking damage from a barge carrying a str 4 30cm lance.

To the IN at that time, such short ranged lances would have represented very little threat, particularly compared to how rare they were relative to other ships of the period.  Same with the heavier armor, since most IN cap ships of the era carried at least one lance.

[Admiral_d_Artagnan]

Actually, it would be for any chapter founded pre-M37 when IN changed over the the Lunar-style ships from the Murder.  Which would be a fair chunk of them

You're mistaken with your time sequence. The heresy happened around M30. Soon after the splitting of responsibilities occured and the IN came into being and the ships were taken from the SM. The current IN design came into being around M37. Design is different from when the ships were removed from the SM's hands.

It's pretty clear in the text that the ban is on ships specifically designed to hunt other ships.  It's not about strike cruisers or any other ship designed to land troops (as, even with a lance, a strike cruiser is still primarily a fire support/close air support platform.) and, further, a precision weapon like a lance, for purposes of fire support, is much superior to 'flattening the city with a BC' since bunkers and other hardened structures are likely to survive a BC, but for a decapitation strike against a hardened bunker, a lance is much superior.  (see Cain's Last Stand for just such a decapitation lance strike against a planetary PDF HQ.)  Since Space Marines are a scalpel, not the sledgehammer of the IG.

And again, what is the weapon in BFG which is used to hunt other ships? Can't you get idea?

Further, if you blow a city to rubble, it makes it harder, not easier, to fight in.  Additionally, it damages infrastructure that the IG follow up landings might want intact.  Like airfields and space ports.  

And you think a lance is that precise? Sorry dude, but the lances are worse when it comes to damaging cities. It's a mega laser. NOTHING will be left of the city.

To the IN at that time, such short ranged lances would have represented very little threat, particularly compared to how rare they were relative to other ships of the period.  Same with the heavier armor, since most IN cap ships of the era carried at least one lance.

You actually think the Slaughter with it's short lances represented very little threat? LOL!

[BaronIveagh]

You're mistaken with your time sequence. The heresy happened around M30. Soon after the splitting of responsibilities occured and the IN came into being and the ships were taken from the SM. The current IN design came into being around M37. Design is different from when the ships were removed from the SM's hands.

M31 and lasted for slightly less then a decade.  And, again, my point was that they would have set up the SM based on the fleets of the time, not the current ones.  

And you think a lance is that precise? Sorry dude, but the lances are worse when it comes to damaging cities. It's a mega laser. NOTHING will be left of the city.

Wrong.  It's stated both in fluff (books, etc) and in the various rule systems that, yes it is (40k, Epic, Rogue Trader).  In fact, as Vaaish pointed out earlier, it can target individual titans from orbit in Epic.  (For a look at a Str 3 60cm lance battery in 40k look up the defense laser for Apocalypse stats on GW's site.  It's the planetary defense laser mentioned in blue book.)

Why else would it have a 50% chance of hitting, as long as the target is in range, if it wasn't accurate?

You actually think the Slaughter with it's short lances represented very little threat? LOL!

No, I think that a Slaughter is superior to an SC.  You need to learn to read what I said before trying to be a wise ass.

[horizon]

Except, Horizon 'that precious prow' didn't exist at the time the Codex was written.  The armored prow was a later invention (See fluff for GCs).  And, no, a single 30cm str 2 lance and a str 4 wb does not equal a str 2 lance and a str 14 wb on a faster and more durable hull (though not as heavily armored), since at the time the codex was written, the SC's navy equivalent would have been the Slaughter.  Same with the Desolator, which can, quite easily, kill a battle barge without ever taking damage from a barge carrying a str 4 30cm lance.

To the IN at that time, such short ranged lances would have represented very little threat, particularly compared to how rare they were relative to other ships of the period.  Same with the heavier armor, since most IN cap ships of the era carried at least one lance.

You didn't get it. Back then without precious prow they issued the lance-ban. With the prow they will even enforce that ban harder!

[Admiral_d_Artagnan]

M31 and lasted for slightly less then a decade.  And, again, my point was that they would have set up the SM based on the fleets of the time, not the current ones.  

And at the time, the fleet contained Murders, Carnages, Devastations, Slaughters, Acheron, Hades, Styx, Repulsives, Vengeances, Avengers, Exorcists, Executors, Retaliators, the Desolators, Emperors and Oberons and a smattering of the Apocalypse and Retribution as well as the Vengeful Spirit variants. What do you think would would be removed from SM hands?

Wrong.  It's stated both in fluff (books, etc) and in the various rule systems that, yes it is (40k, Epic, Rogue Trader).  In fact, as Vaaish pointed out earlier, it can target individual titans from orbit in Epic.  (For a look at a Str 3 60cm lance battery in 40k look up the defense laser for Apocalypse stats on GW's site.  It's the planetary defense laser mentioned in blue book.)

Why else would it have a 50% chance of hitting, as long as the target is in range, if it wasn't accurate?

Uh huh and just how limited is the damage that a lance can do when it targets said Titan? The area around the Titan is what we're talking about. Targeting is different from doing damage.

No, I think that a Slaughter is superior to an SC.  You need to learn to read what I said before trying to be a wise ass.

And you need to figure out what I was saying before making an ass of yourself further. PRECISELY that's what I meant, that even 30 cm on a Slaughter is deadly. You seem to be implying that 30 cm range lances are weak. Well those 30 cm lances on the Slaughter can hurt. And did you notice which among the cruisers at the time had 30 cm lances? Why only the Slaughter and the Executor which are not weak cruisers on any given day. Even gaming shows Slaughters being effective even against its Chaos siblings, which the IN would have been at the time which were the Murders, Devastations, Acheron, Hades and Styx'. So in short, what I am saying is don't pooh pooh 30 cm lances.

[BaronIveagh]

You didn't get it. Back then without precious prow they issued the lance-ban. With the prow they will even enforce that ban harder!

Horizon: Where are you getting the lance ban?  I do not see a rule that 'And they shall know no lances.'  

I DO see 'Inevitably, the wrangling over interpretation of a ship's 'primary role' leads to some chapters possessing rather more versatile fleets then the Imperial Navy is entirely comfortable with.'   Which suggests that A) this is written in the Codex Astartes, and B) even some codex chapters are playing fast and loose with this rule, never mind what non-codex chapters are doing.

In the nova fluff, it talks about how the high speed and F/P/S lance make it a potent gunboat (by the standards of both the current and Heresy Era, as it is faster then almost any other Imperial or chaos ship).  I don't notice anyone suggesting that all space marine vessels but it must have a move of only 15 cm, because planetary landers have no need for the ability to move at high speeds.  

The Nova and Hunter are both specifically designed from the keel up as ship killers, to take on and take out ships outside their displacement class.  It's not the fact that it carries a lance.  It's the fact that it's an absurdly efficient at eliminating ships while having no use either as a boarding platform or an ability to land marines.  It's not just the lance, it's the whole package.  

A lance variant SC is actually far LESS fluff breaking then, say, a str 6 torpedo variant, as a lance has uses for fire support for a landing.

And at the time, the fleet contained Murders, Carnages, Devastations, Slaughters, Acheron, Hades, Styx, Repulsives, Vengeances, Avengers, Exorcists, Executors, Retaliators, the Desolators, Emperors and Oberons and a smattering of the Apocalypse and Retribution as well as the Vengeful Spirit variants. What do you think would would be removed from SM hands?

Well, you left out Swords, which were a new class in M31, and

Uh huh and just how limited is the damage that a lance can do when it targets said Titan? The area around the Titan is what we're talking about. Targeting is different from doing damage.

I may be wrong, since I don't play epic, but reading the pdf, as it's a pinpoint attack, it sound like it doesn't hit much other then the target, since no template is named in the rules I'm looking at.  In 40k it can scatter twice a d6 on a miss, and a single d6 on a hit, and uses the ord template.  In practical terms, it would probably devastate a fair sized building.

I think you may have it confused with a torpedo strike, which does do tremendous property damage in fluff. (See Storm of Iron)

And you need to figure out what I was saying before making an ass of yourself further. PRECISELY that's what I meant, that even 30 cm on a Slaughter is deadly. You seem to be implying that 30 cm range lances are weak. Well those 30 cm lances on the Slaughter can hurt. And did you notice which among the cruisers at the time had 30 cm lances? Why only the Slaughter and the Executor which are not weak cruisers on any given day. Even gaming shows Slaughters being effective even against its Chaos siblings, which the IN would have been at the time which were the Murders, Devastations, Acheron, Hades and Styx'. So in short, what I am saying is don't pooh pooh 30 cm lances.

D'Art, you still arn't getting what I was talking about.  At all.  You're off on a tangent here.  

My point was: At the time, they would have looked at what the SM had and asked: is this stronger then IN?  Is it a threat?

Answer: No, IN has Slaughter (at the time), which is faster, and more heavily armed.  A Strike Cruiser has average speed for a cruiser (of the period), and while heavily armored, has inferior firepower compared to the IN equivalent (of the period) even with a lance.  

Thus, a Strike Cruiser with a lance turret would not be seen as a threat to IN superiority in space at the time the codex was written.

[Plaxor]

I don't understand the argument for the need for a lance. Str3Bcs is about equal to 2 lances. 2 lances, although rare and unique doesn't do anything for a strike cruiser. There is no gameplay reason for it.

The reasons against:
Lances are a very rare and valued weapon, and it is decided that they would be put on IN vessels before Astartes vessels, as the IN's primary function is ship to ship combat. Marines have significantly less use for a lance than they do bombard cannons. Lances are solely for ship to ship combat, and the imperium decided that allowing marines to have such weapons would make them too powerful.

Reasons for:
Marines would likely have some ships from before the heresy, (which are represented by character bbs?), or before mid 30 thousands at least. Some chapters may be more radical and choose to have lance equipped vessels, in spite of the Imperium's decree.

Eh, it's one of those arguments.... let them keep the lance, let them have 1 lance for free. It's a compromise that would make everyone half-happy.

[Admiral_d_Artagnan]

I may be wrong, since I don't play epic, but reading the pdf, as it's a pinpoint attack, it sound like it doesn't hit much other then the target, since no template is named in the rules I'm looking at.  In 40k it can scatter twice a d6 on a miss, and a single d6 on a hit, and uses the ord template.  In practical terms, it would probably devastate a fair sized building.

I think you may have it confused with a torpedo strike, which does do tremendous property damage in fluff. (See Storm of Iron)

No, I am not. Let's do a little thought experiment. Lances are very powerful energy weapons which should be able to tear through the toughest shield and armor a ship can have in space. This energy should enough that it can hit a target from, depending on the lance battery, 0 to 60,000km if we follow the 1:1000 scale which BFG normally follows. This is in a vacuum. Now imagine this weapon turning this amount of power into the atmosphere of a planet striking the planet surface. I would say, it wouldn't be as simple as just devastating a fairsized building.

D'Art, you still arn't getting what I was talking about.  At all.  You're off on a tangent here.  

My point was: At the time, they would have looked at what the SM had and asked: is this stronger then IN?  Is it a threat?

Answer: No, IN has Slaughter (at the time), which is faster, and more heavily armed.  A Strike Cruiser has average speed for a cruiser (of the period), and while heavily armored, has inferior firepower compared to the IN equivalent (of the period) even with a lance.  

Thus, a Strike Cruiser with a lance turret would not be seen as a threat to IN superiority in space at the time the codex was written.

I do get what you are talking about. To the point where you were even pooh pooh-ing a Str 4 30 cm BB. Lances are a threat whether it comes in ones or fours or more from 15 cm to 60 cm. In the end, the simplest way to remove the possibility of any such threat is to remove it entirely because even 1 lance can be a threat as the Nova entry implies since the IN prefer the SM to have it only limited to Escorts and the IN would not want to take chances the SM having it on even one cap ship. Str 1 lance supported by WBs with the speed, armor and maneuverability of the SC might just be enough to take down a Lunar. It can certainly take down a Dauntless.

[horizon]

Thus, a Strike Cruiser with a lance turret would not be seen as a threat to IN superiority in space at the time the codex was written.

Yes it would.

I guess we come at a point where we just don't agree.

A lance is anti-ship. Period.
Anti-ship was disallowed. Dot Com.

[BaronIveagh]

No, I am not. Let's do a little thought experiment. Lances are very powerful energy weapons which should be able to tear through the toughest shield and armor a ship can have in space. This energy should enough that it can hit a target from, depending on the lance battery, 0 to 60,000km if we follow the 1:1000 scale which BFG normally follows. This is in a vacuum. Now imagine this weapon turning this amount of power into the atmosphere of a planet striking the planet surface. I would say, it wouldn't be as simple as just devastating a fairsized building.

Lightening can be over 30,000 degrees C and over a billion volts. It can hit a tree and blow it to flaming kindling without even singeing objects a few feet away because they only last tens of microseconds.  It's not the power or range of the beam, it's the duration that would cause the sort of thermal effects you seem to be alluding to.  

Further, experiments with the US Navy's Mid-Infrared Advanced Chemical Laser showed that a laser weapon based on the surface with only an output in the millions of watts could destroy a target outside the atmosphere (432km).  It had an effective beam about 14cm by 14cm

I do get what you are talking about. To the point where you were even pooh pooh-ing a Str 4 30 cm BB. Lances are a threat whether it comes in ones or fours or more from 15 cm to 60 cm. In the end, the simplest way to remove the possibility of any such threat is to remove it entirely because even 1 lance can be a threat as the Nova entry implies since the IN prefer the SM to have it only limited to Escorts and the IN would not want to take chances the SM having it on even one cap ship. Str 1 lance supported by WBs with the speed, armor and maneuverability of the SC might just be enough to take down a Lunar. It can certainly take down a Dauntless.

Except that at the time the decision was made, the Lunar and Dauntless were not mainline navy ships.  The Lunar may not have existed at all, (IN did not embrace the Lunar for another five thousand years or so) and the Dauntless it's unclear when it came into service, though probably not until after the Slaughter was phased out.  

You keep going back to current IN.  Current IN did not exist at the time.  'Well, it might kill a lunar' That's nice, but when the decision was made, those were still a few thousand years in the future.  At the time, even with lances, SM ships anti-ship ability was average at best.

@Plaxor: As far as lances being rare: at the beginning of the Imperium just about every class of ship seems to have carried them as a standard weapon, one much more common then torpedoes were at the time.  Again, you're thinking as though that were built by the Imperium at the present day.

As far as why: variety.  The game has been slowly stagnating for years due to lack of much new content 'officially'.  If it brings new possibilities to a list, or otherwise shakes things up, I'm all for it.  Personally, I'd like to see two or three new lists a year and at at least ten new ships or options for existing ones. 

@Horizon: Torpedoes are anti-ship, and yet SM are practically crawling with them now.  Other then exterminatus, they have no value for planetary operations whatsoever.  And yet, I don't see you calling for the SC variant with torps to be str 1 and cost 20 points. So, obviously, anti-ship is not disallowed.  TILT

[lastspartacus]

Lances may not be as effective, but they certainly can be used against cities.  Its not a pinpoint, but a laser beam the width of a building.  They can also 'rake'.  Eldar being advanced enough to sometimes prevent this.

I thought this was a purely fluff debate, but to be sure, does anyone actually think a lance for a str3 BC is OP?