Space Marines - Redesign/Rules Development

[horizon]

Well, there is more evidence against lances on SC then for.


The +20pts for 1 lance is perfectly balanced and somehow still justified by fluff in a rare way.

[lastspartacus]

I guess I'll take your word for it then, Horizon   Because thats all I've been able to do since this thread started.

20 points to lose 3bc for 1 lance is the stupidest thing in the game.  It causes me to want to discount everything else you say about balance, in every other thread, if you believe that is balanced.

[Dark Depths]

I agree, it isn't balanced.  But its a compromise between two entrenched points of view. 

[horizon]

LS,
interally it isn't balanced. Agreed.
But in the scope of the whole game called BFG it is balanced.

[BaronIveagh]

See the previous 65 pages, and yes, I accept there is a counter-argument, but my 'gut' says no to lances, mostly.  Thinking about this more seriously I accept that in rare circumstances an SC could have a lance.  I'm just reluctant to make it anything other than a house rule, as I don't see how we can make it a fair option in the fleet list and please everyone.

Personally I liked the idea of limiting it to one per 750.  It makes it rare rather then useless, and is both internally and externally balanced.

@BI.  You are assuming with your AB scenario vs. escorts that the 3 escorts are able to combine turret fire.  What you've outlined is the worst case scenario, which is true.  But if the escorts are attacked individually and therefore unable to mass turrets then the lances are no better, and the AB fair MUCH better. 

The only way to do it if your opponent knows what s/he's doing is to force them to come into contact on a move.  This isn't as easy as it sounds against escorts, as they can turn 90s at any point in their move.  Since I'm told the old epic bases are no longer correct and it's a square warhammer base for a single squadron, it's a lot easier to dodge them.

[Dark Depths]

I must have missed that idea of one per 750.  I could go with that, as long as it wasn't a straight swap out, but cost a few extra points (maybe 5-10?) as well to emphasise their rarity.

[BaronIveagh]

I must have missed that idea of one per 750.  I could go with that, as long as it wasn't a straight swap out, but cost a few extra points (maybe 5-10?) as well to emphasise their rarity.

5 wouldn't be unreasonable.  I could support that, as long as it's str 2 lance for the str 3 bc.

[Dark Depths]

1 per 750pts, +5pts replacing BC, at ST2 lance, 30cm range.  I think this is ok.  Maybe mention in the fluff for the SC how this is very rare.  I'd rather not see everyone do this, as that would be unfluffy. 

[horizon]

Heh, well so a rule like:

You may only do this once per 10 games?

Or at a tournament? The organizer randomly gives them the lance option?


Nah, 1 per 750 will always see 2 per 1000. That's a given and that's the sad panda part about it.

[Dark Depths]

Hence my reluctance.  We could always say 1 per 1000?

[BaronIveagh]

Hence my reluctance.  We could always say 1 per 1000?

I'd make it 1 per 1k isn't bad either.  That's fine too.

[Dark Depths]

Well, if its any use at all, i'd like to propose 1 per 1000, +5pts, st2 30cm lances an official option for the SC, as my prefferred option.

[lastspartacus]

Instead of +5 points, my proposal was 1 per 1k points, str3 BC trades for str2 lances, but front fire only, not l/r/f like the BC.

[BaronIveagh]

Instead of +5 points, my proposal was 1 per 1k points, str3 BC trades for str2 lances, but front fire only, not l/r/f like the BC.

For use against escorts though it'd have to be l/f/r.  Front mount it'd nerf it too far to be used effectively against escorts again. 

So, yes, I agree to 1 per 1k at str 2 l/f/r for +5 points.

[Dark Depths]

Bearing in mind they already have 90degree turns, they should be ok versus escorts.  I think LFR is just too flexible.  At least just firing forward we can argue they are designed for raiding and pinpoint plenet bombrdments, rather than fleet action.