Space Marines - Redesign/Rules Development

[horizon]

Hey,

1) good.
2) Most of us want that instead of the str5 BC.
3) Seems ok.
4) to avoid confusion: add all regular marine bonusses to them.

[Mazila]

3) We suggest this as a global rule for all terminators - chaos terminators included

4) actually there is another option that came up:

  a) roll 2d6, add +1 HnR bonus for being an SM to each roll, choose 1 result that you like
  b) roll 2d6 against crit table (impailer does it, so there is no reason why the best of the SM chapter can't do it)

[Silent Requiem]

Any chance that we can get the sheilds and turrets on the BB officially upgraded? I don't want to have to take the SO just to get a sufficiently surviveable flagship.

-Silent Requiem

[RCgothic]

4. According to the rules, thunderhawks take up 2 ordnance slots instead of the normal 1 that a fighter, bomber or a-boat would use.  Every strike cruiser TECHNICALLY has launch capacity 4.  If you give a light cruiser the ability to launch 4 thunderhawks, you are giving it the same launch capacity as an Emperor battleship. PLEASE justify this insanity to me.

Thunderhawks may be bigger than regular AC (Iffy, Starhawk Bombers are HUGE), but they are fewer in number, so they shouldn't take up 2 Ordnance Slots. Mantas don't.

Thunderhawks are resilient fighter-assault boats. Being a combi-ordnance doesn't make up for the lack of a Bomber option, and Resilience only improves toughness by 20ish percent after accounting for being usually outnumbered and direct fire vulnerability. Again, not worth 2 regular AC.

[flybywire-E2C]

Nids ignore the BM so there is a need for it

You are right. This is because Nids PLACE A BLAST MARKER on ships when they come in contact with them, thanks to their spores. Making clear that they ignore this BM is for clarification. This is also in place to indicate that unlike other fleets, Tyranids also ignore blast markers in contact when being boarded, since getting in contact with them creates a blast marker. 

- Nate

[lastspartacus]

I refer to my manta comment a few posts back in response to madness of the t-hawk logic

[Mazila]

I refer to my manta comment a few posts back in response to madness of the t-hawk logic

This logic is purely for the purpose of taking IN or chaos ships as VBB so that you don't get a VBB despoiler with 8 t-hawks

[lastspartacus]

My point was just to point out that the t-hawk=half space logic is deeply flawed.

I'm not saying barges and S cruisers should have their ordnance doubled, except perhaps on the barge, but perhaps its not rightly costed, or could use something extra to fill the space, like weapons, shield, turret, whatever.

[horizon]

Ehm, LS, your reasoning is flawed. Strike Cruisers/Barges are not build with regular bays. They are build with bays specific for Thunderhawks. So, there is no half space. It is full space as that was the intention.

Furthermore a T-Hawk with 4+ resilience and and option to be a fighter (Cap) and an assault boat with +1 to its dice roll is really good.

The reason it is halved on VBB's is that on a Styx 6 THawks would be a lot better then 6 regular bays.

With the addition of THawk annihilators they gain even more in value.

Thus Space Marine THawks are in all cases rightly costed.

[Mazila]

Any news on the SM draft? You guys are closer to devs than me ))

[BaronIveagh]

I'm unclear why people are wanting lances over the BC.  Last I checked, BC had more or less the same rules as a lance, but also a 50% chance to crit.  I looked around, and couldn't find anyplace that the BC no longer hit on a 4+ regardless of armor, so why is the lance +20 points?

[horizon]

Easy answer: some higher ups or old designers wanted it on Strike Cruisers, the lance I mean. The community did not want lances on Strike Cruisers. So the trade was to make the lance as unattractive as possible. We succeeded and are happy. I am.

[lastspartacus]

I wish there was a couple different options for teleport assaults and boarding that are not included.  Currently, marines stand zero chance against Tyranid ships.  Not saying they should, but definately better odds than they currently have.  Currently Orks, Khorne, and Tyranids absolutely slaughter marines in the one thing they are supposed to be good at.  There should be a double boarding strength option for the close combat specialist marine chapters.

[BaronIveagh]

Easy answer: some higher ups or old designers wanted it on Strike Cruisers, the lance I mean. The community did not want lances on Strike Cruisers. So the trade was to make the lance as unattractive as possible. We succeeded and are happy. I am.

Ok.. I'm reading through, and still not following the logic.  St 2 lances would still be inferior to str 3 BC...  you were upset they gave you a weaker item for free, and wanted it even more nerfed?  This does not compute.

[Vaaish]

Fluff wise, marines shouldn't have access to lances on capital ships and very limited access to escort based lances. The original lance option gave marines a very simple means of having a lance heavy fleet which they shouldn't have access to.