Space Marines - Redesign/Rules Development

[Vaaish]

This keeps getting more nuts. Look, if people want to have lances they SHOULDN'T PLAY MARINES! You do not have to give everyone the same gear just because they might want it. If that were the case, I know some chaos that would love to have cruiser mounted NCs! Marines already have the BC which hits on a 4+ like a lance, adding lances doesn't do anything except break fluff and ignore the gunnery table.

Marine capital ships should not have lances attached to them. period. Why are you so dead set determined to give marines something they shouldn't have? I know it's really easy to just say people you don't want to listen to are the vocal minority and move on, but these issues are things that go far outside of those of us posting here.

That said, no to the SedO. the profile is far out of line with the marine restrictions against lances.

SC should never get lances. Not for 20 points, not for 100 points.

SC variants are interesting, but ultimately have no chance of balance in the form you've posted. You've effectively said that one point of BC strength equals one point of torpedo strength. IIRC it's a common comparison to say one point of torpedo strength is equal to one point of WB strength. The BC is much better than a WB, so the same strength BC upgrade shouldn't be point the same as the same cost torpedoes. A much more fair comparison would be to equate the BC to lances (both hit on 4+ regardless of armor). The common rule with that is a point of lances equals three points of battery strength.  Going that route, the marines should be able to replace the LB for s2 bombardment cannons or s6 torpedoes.

Dominion fleet is much more useful now, though I don't know why I would use it over the armageddon list which basically lets me do the same thing without having to use reserve rules for it.

What this comes down to is that the rules will likely become official if you submit them. In the form they currently are, it doesn't balance and significantly boosts the marines capabilities. As such, it will become the lists used at tournament because it provides an advantage over other fleet lists.

[lastspartacus]

Look, Im never gonna use em, but for a premium points cost and few and far between, there is absolutely zero reason a marine player should not be able to take A lance, or two, on a cap ship.  The nova sets the standard that lances should be rare and costly in its fluff.

Dont use them if you dont want to, but if its no more than 1 lance on an SC or two on a BB, I dont see any fluff discrepency.  Alterations do happen, and the AdMech isnt going to go all extremis on a chapter for sporting a lance turret.

[horizon]

No LS, allowing is opening a can. That can should never opened. Just don't.


I agree with Vaaish on the minority thing. Most of represent a few or more people in a gaming group etc.

[commander]

The loadout of the SC is simply too heavy for a LC.
Launchbays for 2 THs and bombardment cannons, all in the prow?
Too much attempted on too small a chassis.
The battlebarge is also a bit overarmed in the prow with a launch bay for 3 THs (= the equivalent of 6 squadrons of fighters/bombers) and torpedoes. 8 bombardment cannons on the dorsal.
If one stays with the 'old' concept, things are not improving IMO.

For me, SM are all about planetary assaults an precision strikes. They cannot afford to lose time in conducting lenghty space battles. They need, aside heavy short ranged weaponry, fast heavy armoured and shielded vessels which they don't have.

I can be off with my perception, but this is the way I see them. For me, i would look at (regular) battleships to design battlebarges and at (regular) battlecruisers to design strike cruisers, all with 'downgraded' weaponry in favour for armour and speed.

[commander]

Found my notes back.
A battle barge based upon the Retribution (point cost not yet determined).
Armour 6 all around. Other stats unchanged.
Weapons loadout:
prow: 9 torpedoes (also boarding torpedoes)
starboard: S4 bombardment cannons, 1 launch bay (S1 TH)
Port: S4 bombardment cannons, 1 launch bay (S1 TH)
dorsal: S3 bombardment cannons

notes: launch bays allow for double strength AC in play

It is not playtested yet but I think that this ship is very able to smash its way through to deliver the troops at the surface of the planet.
This ship represents how i 'feel' the SM.

[Admiral_d_Artagnan]

Look, Im never gonna use em, but for a premium points cost and few and far between, there is absolutely zero reason a marine player should not be able to take A lance, or two, on a cap ship.  The nova sets the standard that lances should be rare and costly in its fluff.

Dont use them if you dont want to, but if its no more than 1 lance on an SC or two on a BB, I dont see any fluff discrepency.  Alterations do happen, and the AdMech isnt going to go all extremis on a chapter for sporting a lance turret.

SM won't be able to do any such modifications to their ships. They do not have the facilities nor the technical expertise unlike the AdMechs.

And again, the problem is not that I don't like it and so will not play it. The problem is my opponents like it and so will play it against me. They can already get a lot of lances via the Nova or Firestorm if they need to. Cap ships should not have access to them except on a VBB and even then they shouldn't get the ones with a lot of lances.

[lastspartacus]

Honestly Admiral, a couple lances on an SC, from a competative perspective, is only a bit more scary to me than bombardment cannons.

[Admiral_d_Artagnan]

A couple of lances on one SC, sure. A couple of lances on a couple of SCs backed up by a battleship's 4? Not scary enough for you? The list I made not good enough: the SO (450), 4 vanilla SCs (580) and 2 Str 2 lance armed SCs (330), 2 Firestorms (90) and Master of the Fleet (50) at 1500 points? That's 14 lances in all. I'd be hiding the escorts behnid the bigger ships and let the cap ships do most of the work with the Firestorms as mopping up guys. Or I can I can drop 1 Vanilla SC and with the remaining points get another 3 Firestorms for additional 3 more lances to the total. Note the fleet I listed also has 14 TH support. Remove 1 SC and I still get 12 TH support.

In sub 1k games, I remove the SO, remove 1 Vanilla SC and I can have 4 Firestorms in there. That's 8 lances in 1k games plus 10 TH support.

[lastspartacus]

Not the scenario I was talking about.  Like I said.  Few lances, points premium.  Thats what I think.  Make it so you can only take em if you really want to but without it being a really good idea.

[Admiral_d_Artagnan]

The problem is it's not few and it's not points premium. Look at the list I made. That's with premium built in already. Multiple 6+ armored ships which have high speed and maneuverability. Get behind the enemy lines, sandwich the enemy between the SCs and the SO and they'll be in for a lot of hurt from the combination WB, BC, Lances and TH. Chaos' Alpha Strike Murders and Eldar Hemlocks have great chances against it but those are the exception.

That list I made is what  would bring in a competitive scenario. I'm fulfilling everything the rules require, premium (+20) and few (more Vanilla SCs than there is variant). What more do you need to see that there is a problem?

[lastspartacus]

Right, I never said, or didnt mean to imply, that I was talking about the way the draft currently is, just how I envision it.

[horizon]

Still, fitting with background they should not have lances even at premium prizes in this or any other draft.

[flybywire-E2C]

This keeps getting more nuts. Look, if people want to have lances they SHOULDN'T PLAY MARINES! You do not have to give everyone the same gear just because they might want it. If that were the case, I know some chaos that would love to have cruiser mounted NCs! Marines already have the BC which hits on a 4+ like a lance, adding lances doesn't do anything except break fluff and ignore the gunnery table.

Marine capital ships should not have lances attached to them. period. Why are you so dead set determined to give marines something they shouldn't have? I know it's really easy to just say people you don't want to listen to are the vocal minority and move on, but these issues are things that go far outside of those of us posting here.

That said, no to the SedO. the profile is far out of line with the marine restrictions against lances.

SC should never get lances. Not for 20 points, not for 100 points.

SC variants are interesting, but ultimately have no chance of balance in the form you've posted. You've effectively said that one point of BC strength equals one point of torpedo strength. IIRC it's a common comparison to say one point of torpedo strength is equal to one point of WB strength. The BC is much better than a WB, so the same strength BC upgrade shouldn't be point the same as the same cost torpedoes. A much more fair comparison would be to equate the BC to lances (both hit on 4+ regardless of armor). The common rule with that is a point of lances equals three points of battery strength.  Going that route, the marines should be able to replace the LB for s2 bombardment cannons or s6 torpedoes.

Dominion fleet is much more useful now, though I don't know why I would use it over the armageddon list which basically lets me do the same thing without having to use reserve rules for it.

What this comes down to is that the rules will likely become official if you submit them. In the form they currently are, it doesn't balance and significantly boosts the marines capabilities. As such, it will become the lists used at tournament because it provides an advantage over other fleet lists.

I understand the concerns from a purist standpoint, but using this argument, then the Nova and Firestorm should be dislallowed as well. 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!

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.

- Nate

[horizon]

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.

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.

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 dissalow lances to them.

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.).

Still we wait views on:
- the refit we don't like.
- the seditio opprimere which should be dropped or changed (weapon batteries) because no one likes the ship. There is no majority which likes it.
- the 2nd shield on strike cruisers minus 1 bay
- your draft 'devestator' with too many bombardments

[lastspartacus]

Linebreaker, becuase there are already WAY too many classes that start with D