Space Marines - Redesign/Rules Development

[lastspartacus]

You are letting your rampant fanboyism for space marines come before anything else.
Space marines are NOT important in this setting.

I understand this.  I really do.  I hate 40k almost as passionately as I love BFG.  In part because of the obvious factional favoritism involved in it.  But this isnt 40k.
I would say that you are in equal part letting your hate of smurf-worship cloud your judgement :p
Believe me, I've been there.

But marines are important, as important as any fleet and no more so, in BFG.  They have their place.  And if we want to see more of them on the tabletop, we should try to make them as fun and balanced as any fleet, with their own weaknesses, and certainly their own strenghts.

I don't plan on using a VBB, maybe not a blackship either, when I get around to collecting my own marine fleet.
But I sure as hell would like them to be available if I do,
as long as they fit with space marines.

As to Doctrines, I have yet to hear an argument besides 'No!' to the idea.  Anybody?

I would also really like to hear more input on what you guys think about the rules specific stuff like ship variants and teleport rules we were talking about a few pages ago, before derailing into VBB talk.
Edit:  What if, for every lance on a VBB, it is replaced by str3 of WB?  Thats the exchange rate, right?

[Don Gusto]

I find it funny how everyone seems to call for more shields as soon as a list comes under review.
Can we please give the Ork Kill Kroozer another shield and call it even at 165 points?

No seriously, the SM Strike Cruiser is a light cruiser (shown clearly by its 90° turn) and should only have 1 shield. It is also the best light cruiser I know and for 145 points it's a steal. Adding another shield for just +10 points is ... well ... a bad idea.

Regarding the proposed draft:
I'm mostly impartial to fluff heresy and my own interest in Space Marines is slim. Just a few questions and remarks from my part:

The pure SM list in Armada is quite limited and I think it's a good idea to give it more options. Imho diversity is good for BFG and theres nothing wrong with a more flexible independent marine fleet as long as it stays balanced.

Thunderhawk Annihilator
These will provide an SM fleet with a lot more firepower. It turns any group of SM capitals into a full blown carrier fleet. Maybe have them as an upgrade option with extra cost, similar to assault ships for the Emperor?
How would they work with turret suppression? Similar to Fighta Bommaz?

Venerable Battle Barge
Unique to a given fleet, +35 points and with worse armor it also gets a big 'lock me on'. Seems to me balanced enough.

Seditio Opprimere
Trades 12 wb's and 1 launch bay for 4 lances. 4 lances is like 12 wb's so its -1 launch bay. With the lances it gains more punch beyond 30cm but I don't think that makes it overpowered. It's still unique and can't be combined with another vbb.

Strike Cruiser Variants
Pick one refit for +20 points. That's an easy fix to provide more variety in Strike Cruisers but the same idea didn't work well with tyranids. It should be a bit more restricted.
Some ideas: No refit twice, only half the sc's can take a refit, choose category but roll for the refit or vice versa.
Lance variants: Personally I would never trade 3 bc's for 1 lance with the same range, it's a downgrade. The 2 lances are front only and can't be combined with the broadside batterys. 2 lances for 4wb+3bc? Not sure I would take that either.

Dominion Fleet List
Option for cheaper SM ships, ok. But I can buy them at full value anyway without penalty? Hm why would I not prefer this list? No Thunderhawk Annihilators or is that an oversight in the ordnance section?

[Zelnik]

Well, yes, i think that adding the option to take battleships that were not meant for them WILL break the game, thanks for reading my mind.

Yes, you are guilty of fanboyism because you simply can't listen to reason when people post other suggestions that would make more sense, and trying to give them things they neither need nor deserve.  I don't even understand why your having problems with the fleet as it stands, I have a 3000 point grey knights fleet that has a very good win record, and the last tournament that i played in had a space marine player come in second place.

As far as i can tell, people just want more, more, more for space marines, not caring about genra or backstory.  

By the way, have you ever considered playing Segmentum Solar? you know, that giant fleet list that lets you take BOTH Space marine AND imperial navy ships? you can take an Emperor battleship with space marine strike cruisers legally! without changing any rules!

I support the idea of adding the blackship. It's a good fit for the fleet as it stands.  I have no problem with making "venerated" an upgrade to a NORMAL battle barge, so long as it isn't game breaking.  I have a huge problem with people landing Retributions, Oberon, Emperor and Despoiler battleships and saying "lolmarines" on top of it. I also have a huge problem with doctrines because they were already factored in with their incredible leadership.  

[russ_c]

Adding another shield for just +10 points is ... well ... a bad idea.

This is based on what?  I play a SM player all the time and he can't beat me.  We talk strategy every game and he adjusts his tactics accordingly, but to no avail.  No other fleet in BFG is dependent on light cruisers and the SM fleet proves that light cruisers can't hold the line (in my experience).  Thus, they are an exception so I don't think it's a stretch to give them another shield.  Their are plenty of other ships in BFG breaking from the conventional rule set.

Strike Cruiser Variants
Pick one refit for +20 points. That's an easy fix to provide more variety in Strike Cruisers but the same idea didn't work well with tyranids. It should be a bit more restricted.
Some ideas: No refit twice, only half the sc's can take a refit, choose category but roll for the refit or vice versa.
Lance variants: Personally I would never trade 3 bc's for 1 lance with the same range, it's a downgrade. The 2 lances are front only and can't be combined with the broadside batterys. 2 lances for 4wb+3bc? Not sure I would take that either.

This is already in the proposed rules in the grey box at the bottom.  I don't see the point sense only a couple are worth taking, as the majority are LD bonuses that SM don't need so it would be a waste of points more often then naught.

Russ

[fracas]

its ok for light cruiser to have one shield because they are meant to complement standard cruisers

orks have 10 hull points for their 1 shield cruiser, so that also balance it out

whereas the strike cruiser's armor 6 doesn't balance out the 1 shield because armor doesn't mean a damn against lances or even bombardment cannon
and its the only cruiser SM has

in fact, when you get down to it, having 2 shields strike cruiser is really is the only change SM really needs

[Vaaish]

I don't mind small benefits for having the title, however whats the point of giving leadership bonuses for a fleet that is already LD 8-9-10?

not much, really. I was listing possible ways the venerable attribute could show up based on what reference we have and similar bonuses grated to ships like the Mars and Emperor. It would still have a small effect since it would counter the BM -1 penalty.

Well, yes, i think that adding the option to take battleships that were not meant for them WILL break the game, thanks for reading my mind.

I have a huge problem with people landing Retributions, Oberon, Emperor and Despoiler battleships and saying "lolmarines" on top of it.

By the way, have you ever considered playing Segmentum Solar? you know, that giant fleet list that lets you take BOTH Space marine AND imperial navy ships? you can take an Emperor battleship with space marine strike cruisers legally! without changing any rules!

Zelnik, You can't argue both ways. Having the option to take an emperor or apocalypse or oberon BB in a marine fleet is already here, as you mentioned, and it doesn't break the game. With the Emperor and Oberon you are looking at defacto ld9 or better anyway. All you are missing are the thunderhawks and boarding bonuses.

[Zelnik]

Your right, in fact, it says that 'marine ships cannot be squadroned with navy ships"


However, the cost of fielding those two fleets together is the lack of those 2+ boarding bonuses, ld, and hit and run attacks in the entire fleet.  I will quote one of my favorite villains in saying "Now Krang, you can't have everything you see on TV".

IF you want lances in your marine fleet, and your impressive battleships, play segmentum solar.  If you want space marines alone, deal with the consequences of having none.  

[horizon]

Ahem,

Zelnik are you suggesting to have the Nova  Frigate and Firestorm RVS escorts removed from the Space Marine lists?

I see no problem with VBB's, if lance heavy ships are forbidden to be vbb that's cool.

And when coming to background, as much as every rules purist hates it, black library has become interwoven into the GW universe. They are as much canon as a rulebook. If you like it or not.

[lastspartacus]

Why not just have a WB changeout ratio?

I don't get the vitriol in this discussion.  No one is trying to make SM overpowered, just trying to help out what could be the most underpowered fleet in the game.  And, more importantly to me, make a fleet one can take and run something besides the same list every game.

Strike cruisers need 2 shields alot more than other light cruisers.  And it makes fluff sense, since they are all about protecting their valuable cargo.
Think of a strike cruiser as a fast, underweight cruiser.  I could accept a 1 shield SC though, but I also have come to agree that 1 TH makes a whole lot more sense on an SC, so I would like to see that happen and a points drop.  That, and if it goes down to one TH, it will be easier to make variants.

Orks have an extra 2 hits, and for the record tend to pwn marines in close quarters too, which is sad.

If done properly and balanced, what is the fundamental dislike of Doctrine options?  

What thoughts of the battlebarge?

[horizon]

Overlooked page 7 ...

Don Gusto: you dislike the 2nd shield but approve of the S.O.? That's weird.

Also: shields cost 10pts per point of shield. Yes.

Orks can get more shields on kroozers.

[Vaaish]

Your right, in fact, it says that 'marine ships cannot be squadroned with navy ships"

To be fair, we are talking about BB class vessels which wouldn't be allowed in a squadron with the cruiser anyhow. I guess there could be something said for an empy and BB in the same squadron, but I find it somewhat less likely.

the cost of fielding those two fleets together is the lack of those 2+ boarding bonuses, ld, and hit and run attacks in the entire fleet

This is incorrect. Nothing in the Segmentum solar list removes the space marine special rules from marine vessels. All marine vessels may still launch boarding torpedoes, get the boarding bonus, ld, and +1 to hit and run attacks because, despite being a combined fleet, they are still marine ships. Obviously, Navy vessels included in the fleet would not get these bonuses. However, that isn't the point of the discussion. The point is, you are still able to field a marine fleet that plays as a marine fleet, having all the benefits of a marine fleet with nearly all of the IN battleships.

[Admiral_d_Artagnan]

Well, yes, i think that adding the option to take battleships that were not meant for them WILL break the game, thanks for reading my mind.

Really? How so? A ship with 6+/5+ or even just 5+ armor, 4 shields and 4 turrets and focused mainly on WBs with 2-3 lances and/or AC/Torps will break the game? You exaggerate too much. I'm even willing to bet you haven't tried it. I have. Doesn't make much difference. It's still supported by powerful LCs. That's about it.SM still have a hard time in fleet actions.

Yes, you are guilty of fanboyism because you simply can't listen to reason when people post other suggestions that would make more sense, and trying to give them things they neither need nor deserve.  I don't even understand why your having problems with the fleet as it stands, I have a 3000 point grey knights fleet that has a very good win record, and the last tournament that i played in had a space marine player come in second place.

I have been listening to other people and their suggestions, unlike you who I have only seen insist on maintaining the status quo or adding an unofficial ship which is not even SM or IN. I shoot down any suggestions to give them easy access to multiple long ranged and short ranged lances. I would give them something fluffy within limits. I would give them more protection than norm since they can't have as much variety as the other races.

Really? They don't need or deserve any modifications? Tell that to the many disappointed with SM. Harping on your own wins or another players win doesn't really mean they don't need it. It just either means:

a. You're a very good player (as well as the second place winner) or
b. Your opponent's play leave much to be desired or
c. A combination of both.

In any case, it is not good proof that a fleet does not need fixes and mainly just representative of your area's meta. Note I am not trying to diss your opponent's. I don't know how you people play. I'm just saying those are the possible reasons why you are having a good record. If you're opponents are good, then it means you must be really good.

SM has been complained about ever since they came out. Sure, there is the good player who can make them work but the problem is he is the exception to the rule. Most of the time, people find them lacking. I and a few others are then trying to find ways to balance them out. I'm even willing to limit them to the Emperor and Oberon if your objection is against any ship with more than 2 lances to one side, thus removing the Retribution from the list.

Definitely I am against SM having ready access to ship killing lances in anything more than 3 to one side but I am willing to go down to 2. I only added the Retribution because it is the only battleship with torps which the SM can make use of. Hell, I even remembered just now there was a suggestion before to replace the long ranged lances with BCs. We can do that as well and lower the cost a bit instead of adding 35 points, we can add 20-25 points.

As far as i can tell, people just want more, more, more for space marines, not caring about genra or backstory.  

Yes, some people will want more and I would shoot them down if they didn't care about genre or back story. It doesn't mean I totally shut off any way of improving SM within the game to the point where people want to play them.

By the way, have you ever considered playing Segmentum Solar? you know, that giant fleet list that lets you take BOTH Space marine AND imperial navy ships? you can take an Emperor battleship with space marine strike cruisers legally! without changing any rules!

Of course I have. Not everyone, however, wants a mix of IN and SM ships. Some want to be purist.

I support the idea of adding the blackship. It's a good fit for the fleet as it stands.  I have no problem with making "venerated" an upgrade to a NORMAL battle barge, so long as it isn't game breaking.  I have a huge problem with people landing Retributions, Oberon, Emperor and Despoiler battleships and saying "lolmarines" on top of it. I also have a huge problem with doctrines because they were already factored in with their incredible leadership.  

I fail to understand why you don't like SM to have access to the Emperor when it only has FP16 WBs at most to one side and FP11 to both and total of 4 THs. Retribution only has FP12 WBs+3 lances to one side or FP12+split of lances to both sides and torp support. Oberon has FP16+2 lances to one side or FP11+2 lances to one side and 2 TH support. Compare this to the FP10 WBs and FP8 BCs to one side or FP10 WBs +FP4 BCs to both sides plus torp and TH support esp if the WB+BC fix is introduced. The BB would still own in ranges 30 cm and below and all those IN type battleships have weaker armor compared to the regular Battle Barge and so are just as vulnerable.

Sure the others have farther range. Won't really kill a cruiser beyond 30 cm unless one gets lucky on the rolls much less hurt a battleship one on one. How is this game breaking again?

[Admiral_d_Artagnan]

I find it funny how everyone seems to call for more shields as soon as a list comes under review.
Can we please give the Ork Kill Kroozer another shield and call it even at 165 points?

No seriously, the SM Strike Cruiser is a light cruiser (shown clearly by its 90° turn) and should only have 1 shield. It is also the best light cruiser I know and for 145 points it's a steal. Adding another shield for just +10 points is ... well ... a bad idea.

Not really when you consider that they only have 6 hit points. They should be armored and shielded well enough that said 6 HP ship can get near the planet to begin their drop and/or bombardment. 1 shield isn't enough for 6 HP ships even with 6+ armor in a game with lances which hit at 4+.

[lastspartacus]

Seconded.

Although I would much rather see it be traded for a TH than get a points increase.

[Admiral_d_Artagnan]

Yes, I do think SC with 1 less TH but 1 more shield would be fair at 145 points. Less offensive punch esp now that it looks like SM will have access to the THA. That really balances things a bit because I am leery of Str 2 THAs coming out of 1 LC sized ship. On the other hand the WB/BC interaction looks like will be fixed as well so there is some improvement on that armament combo. I think it's fair.

Strike Cruiser
HP/Type: 6/Cruiser
Arm: 6+
Shield: 2
Turret: 2
Turns: 90'
Speed: 25 cm

Armament:
Port/Starboard Weapon Batteries: FP4 Rng 30 cm
Prow Bombardment Cannons:FP3 Rng 30 cm
Prow Launch Bays: Str 1 Thunderhawk/Thunderhawk Annihilator

I'm even comfortable with putting it at flat 150 points.