Space Marines - Redesign/Rules Development

[Plaxor]

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

Nope, 3bc equals about 2 lances.

[BaronIveagh]

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?

Actually, according to fluff from RT, only certain archeotech versions can maintain the beam for more then a second.  However, in the GW 28mm scale model of a planetary defense laser, which is a 60cm str 3 lance, the actual aperture of the laser , according to scale, would only be a few feet wide.  Which would more or less mesh with having blast radius of about 20 feet to scale.

[lastspartacus]

Nope, 3bc equals about 2 lances.

Well, whatever. I was just making sure none of these good sensible people were actually trying to argue it from a gameplay perspective.


'I want to give this fleet an option that is rare, so I think I'll make it a variant option, but weaker than the current one to balance it out, just for those players who want to use certain chapters of this fleet.'

'I dunno, thats a good start, but iif some lunatic wanted to take all of those rare variants, that wouldn't be very fluffy, so lets impose a limit on the number of those variants that can be taken in the fleet.'

'Hey, thats a great idea.  Wait, no, nevermind.  Lets just allow the weaker option, but also charge 20 points for it.'


Terrible game design.  This might be more of the tabletop game you are looking for

http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fb/Airfix54mm.JPG&imgrefurl=http://pulp-zen.blogspot.com/2008/12/ethics-of-toys.html&usg=__e7u2s6WwTYt73FBCNue25JDm3HU=&h=1712&w=2288&sz=1923&hl=en&start=0&sig2=MAw0g4uNxcv62baY0jg85g&zoom=1&tbnid=uOJuRB7FxbcM1M:&tbnh=107&tbnw=154&ei=MGEETc6HC8HflgeTqujdCQ&prev=/images%3Fq%3Darmy%2Bmen%2Btoys%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN%26biw%3D1138%26bih%3D535%26tbs%3Disch:1&um=1&itbs=1&iact=rc&dur=405&oei=MGEETc6HC8HflgeTqujdCQ&esq=1&page=1&ndsp=20&ved=1t:429,r:8,s:0&tx=67&ty=6

[Vaaish]

limits to the numbers of variants taken is already in place. the 20 points for the lance is to ensure that no one takes it outside of the odd fluff reason. If we'd had our way the lance option wouldn't even be there and we wouldn't be having this discussion.

[Plaxor]

If it were my choice I would make it a +10 point upgrade for two lances. Or an even trade off for 1. Rare/somewhat unfluffy things are usually costed more to make fleet lists resemble what is supposed to be true. Much like torpedoes on the vengeance gcs in the modification thread, probably should cost 20, but the decision was to overcost it slightly to show it's rarity/difficulty in repairing non-redundant systems etc.

I can see the reason behind it, but +20 for a weaker option is a bit much. +5 or +10 maybe.

At free for 1 the player could choose to have a different option, and make their fleet of someone radical like the minotaurs. However this would be at the cost of some firepower and wouldn't be the optimal thing to do, so most people would only do it for fluff reasons.

It's like a lot of the options for different variants of the IN dominator and tyrant. Not worthwhile, but more for a fluff standpoint than anything. Or the lower hit version of the merchant.

[lastspartacus]

I think a tradeoff for one lance is the best option.  Not as good as a str3 BC, but you dont have to pay stupid tax for it.

[Admiral_d_Artagnan]

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.  

and you're comparing lightning to something which is more powerful and has more duration than tens of microseconds?

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

And again, you're comparing puny tech to highly advanced and designed for maximum destructive tech 30,000 years into the future?

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.

It doesn't matter if current IN ships didn't exist at the time. What matters is SM do not get anything which can even remotely threaten IN, whether they were using Murders or Slaughters or Lunars or Dauntless'. The only way for that to happen is not giving SM lances.

[horizon]

LS, you must be clear at that point, the game designer in this case (Nate & friends) wanted the lance for free in the beginning. Even str2 at one point. So the design was like a 1 on 1 call.

Then the fans (at least some/majority?) screamed murder evil burn at the idea of Marines getting lances since that was not allowed by the background story (if BaronI reads his own arguments next week he'll see he is in support of even higher anti-lance enforcement by the Imperium ).

So the HA, a) having gotten old design directions from the old HA needed to keep the lance but came forward and made the lance extra costed. To follow the logic of background.

So, do not call it terrible game design. But more bringing game design with no fluff support into a a fluff supported setting.

[BaronIveagh]

and you're comparing lightning to something which is more powerful and has more duration than tens of microseconds?

Oh?  Point me to the fluff that says it lasts for longer then tens of microseconds.  The only fluff I've found so far is statements that a lance shot only lasts a fraction of a second. The Starflare pattern lace from the RT is a piece of archeotech that is an exception to this (according to it's fluff) that can maintain a beam long enough to be raked across the target.  However, that might be a relative amount of time, because at range, the turret would move a very tiny bit to rake even a Battleship (we're talking a few hundredths of a degree of motion.

This would imply that the beam is of such short duration in most lances that it's impossible to move the turret fast enough to do so.  Since a turret can track a ship 60,000km away and hit it, this would imply that they're quite fast tracking.  

All described lance strikes in 'books' as you like to call them, as though being a book made it somehow less, indicate that all most people not caught in it see is a sudden flash of light and a tremendous bang.  Usually a building or some similar object is noticed missing shortly thereafter.  

And again, you're comparing puny tech to highly advanced and designed for maximum destructive tech 30,000 years into the future?

Well, other then the lances would have been designed before 30k years in the future, since 40k Imperium tech is on a downslope, MIRACL (don't you love military acronyms?) has a power output that could be compared to a 40k laser destroyer LR variant.  Make the thing about hundred times bigger, and give it a private nuke to power it, and you have a lance, or something that can do a passable impersonation of one.

Most things you see in 40k, unless it has to do with the warp, or magic space marine implants (which must have been designed by Tzeench, because none of the other chaos gods would have failed biology so epicly), we can more or less do, if not right now, within the next decade or two.

Except make a five kilometer long space ship with a density lower then styrofoam.  I'm still working that one out.

It doesn't matter if current IN ships didn't exist at the time. What matters is SM do not get anything which can even remotely threaten IN, whether they were using Murders or Slaughters or Lunars or Dauntless'. The only way for that to happen is not giving SM lances.

Yes, because lances are clearly less threatening to ships then, say, vortex torpedoes.  (Which SM are permitted)

Here's the thing, you guys seem absolutely hung up on the idea that it's the weapon.  It's not.  It's the whole package.  Otherwise Fortress Monasteries wouldn't mount lances (and before anyone freaks that lances on FM are new, they have had them since the original Rogue Trader.  And, for those of us who think they're too powerful, including me, the originals were stated to have over 80 lance batteries).  Let me use an example from history: once upon a time, the RN got an idea to mount a 12 inch naval gun on a submarine.  Needless to say, it did not work as well as a 12 inch gun mounted on a battleship, despite being the exact same weapon.  Your assertion is that no matter what hull the weapon is mounted on, it's autoimatically equally as dangerous.  To me, that's like saying that an 88 mounted on a parked opel blitz is just as dangerous as the one mounted in a koenigstiger chasing you through the hedgerows.  While, yes, it will likely inflict the same damage if it hits you, the one mounted in the koenigstiger is actually much more dangerous.

And, bluntly, the only way a SM ship could never, ever, ever be a threat to IN is if it had no weapons and no engines.  And, according to fluff, this was suggested.  What the primarchs said to this was not recorded, other then it was not accepted.  One would imagine that their actual responses though were rather short and anatomically improbable.

[horizon]

Of all the vessels in the service of the Adeptus Astartes, the Nova class
frigate is commonly the single class to which the Imperial navy take the
most exception. It lacks sufficient size to really fulfil the deployment and
assault roles for which Space Marine ships are primarily intended and its
lance armament and speed make it a menacing gunboat in its own right. As
such, the Nova remains rare in most Space Marine fleets, a trend the
Imperial Navy, the Inquisition and other institutions perpetually concerned
by the balance of power would dearly love to see continue.

Bold Part:
Lances and the position of the Imperium & Inquistion regarding them. Pretty clear.

[BaronIveagh]

Of all the vessels in the service of the Adeptus Astartes, the Nova class
frigate is commonly the single class to which the Imperial navy take the
most exception. It lacks sufficient size to really fulfil the deployment and
assault roles for which Space Marine ships are primarily intended and its
lance armament and speed make it a menacing gunboat in its own right. As
such, the Nova remains rare in most Space Marine fleets, a trend the
Imperial Navy, the Inquisition and other institutions perpetually concerned
by the balance of power would dearly love to see continue.

Bold Part:
Lances and the position of the Imperium & Inquistion regarding them. Pretty clear.

No, the word that should be highlighted is 'gunboat' or 'gunship'.  It's mentioned again and again in the fluff about things SM can't have bigger then escorts.  Lances are only mentioned once in the Nova fluff.  

"Instead, a compromise was reached which limited the Space Marines to vessels whose primary role was that of transport, delivery, and suppression designed to facilitate planetary assault. Only the smallest of vessels would be permitted to act exclusively as gunships..." Armada, page 20.  (italics mine)

"Inevitably, the wrangling over interpretation of a ship’s ‘primary role’ leads to some chapters possessing rather more versatile fleets than the Imperial Navy is entirely comfortable with." Armada, Page 20.  [no italics needed]

"The vessel, although larger than any genuine gunboats likely to be in use, is relatively small by Space Marine standards, seldom carrying much more than a single squad of Space Marines... and is of little use in their favoured planetary assaults, but instead earns itself an admirable place as the foremost ship of the line when it comes to more mundane border patrols and deep space blockades." Fluff for Gladius class

"It lacks sufficient size to really fulfil the deployment and assault roles for which Space Marine ships are primarily intended and its lance armament and speed make it a menacing gunboat in its own right." Nova class fluff.


Again and again it comes back to 'gunboat' and 'primary role'.  Not lances.  Not torps.  Not anti-ship weapons.  The role the ship is designed for.  A ship built exclusivly as a weapons carrier would qualify as a 'gunboat'.  A strike cruiser with a str 2 lance would not.   In fact, a Strike Cruiser, designed to be the first ship to enter a contested system, would be totally justified in having lances, as it's 'primary role' is given in several places as a first responder to a crisis.

"A typical offensive against a rebel or alien-held planet begins with the arrival of strike craft which engage and clear away defending system ships and may establish a hidden base located within an asteroid field or on a small moon if a protracted campaign is being undertaken." Armada, page 26

"Their primary function seems to be that of rapid response, reports indicating that they are invariably the first craft to arrive at a threatened planet." - Strike Cruiser fluff entry.

"Like battlebarges, strike cruisers do not represent a single class of vessel, or specific configurations of weapons and systems, but rather represent a broad range of different Space Marine vessels used for largely similar tasks. ... Other chapters, too, possess widely differing forms of strike cruiser, each shaped by centuries of tradition and varying doctrine amongst the chapters of the Adeptus Astartes." Armada, page 23 (italics mine)


By the logic presented by the anti-lance faction, as long as the ship has no lances, it's allowed, because it's the lances that make it a threat.  This flies in the face of fluff, as clearly the prohibition is on 'pure' warships with no capability to support landings.

[Admiral_d_Artagnan]

Oh?  Point me to the fluff that says it lasts for longer then tens of microseconds.  The only fluff I've found so far is statements that a lance shot only lasts a fraction of a second. The Starflare pattern lace from the RT is a piece of archeotech that is an exception to this (according to it's fluff) that can maintain a beam long enough to be raked across the target.  However, that might be a relative amount of time, because at range, the turret would move a very tiny bit to rake even a Battleship (we're talking a few hundredths of a degree of motion.

Do the math. At 30,000 km, the equivalent of 30 cm, it should last a 10th of a second at least. For 60,000 km, 1/5th of a second. Definitely more than microseconds.

Well, other then the lances would have been designed before 30k years in the future, since 40k Imperium tech is on a downslope, MIRACL (don't you love military acronyms?) has a power output that could be compared to a 40k laser destroyer LR variant.  Make the thing about hundred times bigger, and give it a private nuke to power it, and you have a lance, or something that can do a passable impersonation of one.

Assuming again.

Yes, because lances are clearly less threatening to ships then, say, vortex torpedoes.  (Which SM are permitted)

Oh, definitely esp since Vortex torpedoes are not readily available, whether in the game or in the books even and ones which can quite easily be taken out as long as one has AC. Can you take out a lance shot?

Here's the thing, you guys seem absolutely hung up on the idea that it's the weapon.  It's not.  It's the whole package.  Otherwise Fortress Monasteries wouldn't mount lances (and before anyone freaks that lances on FM are new, they have had them since the original Rogue Trader.  And, for those of us who think they're too powerful, including me, the originals were stated to have over 80 lance batteries).  Let me use an example from history: once upon a time, the RN got an idea to mount a 12 inch naval gun on a submarine.  Needless to say, it did not work as well as a 12 inch gun mounted on a battleship, despite being the exact same weapon.  Your assertion is that no matter what hull the weapon is mounted on, it's autoimatically equally as dangerous.  To me, that's like saying that an 88 mounted on a parked opel blitz is just as dangerous as the one mounted in a koenigstiger chasing you through the hedgerows.  While, yes, it will likely inflict the same damage if it hits you, the one mounted in the koenigstiger is actually much more dangerous.

So do you use a FM in your fleet? And you're actually confirming for us that it is the weapon mounted on cap ships (the Koenigstiger) instead of the Escort (the Opel Blitz) which is dangerous which is what we have been pointing out all along. The whole package as you say. Tada. Thank you for playing.

And, bluntly, the only way a SM ship could never, ever, ever be a threat to IN is if it had no weapons and no engines.  And, according to fluff, this was suggested.  What the primarchs said to this was not recorded, other then it was not accepted.  One would imagine that their actual responses though were rather short and anatomically improbable.

And the IN would have been happy to take that deal. Unfortunately, we all know how horsetrading works so SM still has to get some weapons as long as it cannot threaten the IN capital ships.

[Admiral_d_Artagnan]

A strike cruiser with a str 2 lance would not.   In fact, a Strike Cruiser, designed to be the first ship to enter a contested system, would be totally justified in having lances, as it's 'primary role' is given in several places as a first responder to a crisis.

Yes it would. The thing has FP4 WBs, Str 3 BCs and THs. It is a gunship already but not as efficient as the IN contemporaries. To give it Str 2 lances, it would now be a much more effective ship rivaling a Dauntless which has FP4 WBs and Str3 lances.

"A typical offensive against a rebel or alien-held planet begins with the arrival of strike craft which engage and clear away defending system ships and may establish a hidden base located within an asteroid field or on a small moon if a protracted campaign is being undertaken." Armada, page 26

Yup. System ships which the current SC and Escorts can easily handle. Establishing moon bases which do not require lances.

"Their primary function seems to be that of rapid response, reports indicating that they are invariably the first craft to arrive at a threatened planet." - Strike Cruiser fluff entry.

Yup and if they find a Chaos task force orbiting the planet? Should they charge in headlong?

"Like battlebarges, strike cruisers do not represent a single class of vessel, or specific configurations of weapons and systems, but rather represent a broad range of different Space Marine vessels used for largely similar tasks. ... Other chapters, too, possess widely differing forms of strike cruiser, each shaped by centuries of tradition and varying doctrine amongst the chapters of the Adeptus Astartes." Armada, page 23 (italics mine)

And so we present other profiles like all launch bay BBs and SCs. Maybe torp heavy. Those are different weapons which do not have to have lances as part of the package. Doctrines and tradition would mainly be how they like to handle things. Some prefer assaulting (boarding, hit and runs, fighting up close) while others like siege tactics and bombarding from afar (which WBs and BCs are well suited in doing).

By the logic presented by the anti-lance faction, as long as the ship has no lances, it's allowed, because it's the lances that make it a threat.  This flies in the face of fluff, as clearly the prohibition is on 'pure' warships with no capability to support landings.

Nope, it does not. Yes, the lances make the ship a threat against another ship. The only thing that can minimize a lance's damage are shields. WBs and BCs are affected by BMs, shields and for the former, armor values and both are subject to the gunnery table. Torps and AC while ignoring shields are affected by armor value and can be shot down by turrets and AC. NCs are affected by shields only as well but it has it's own problems in the scatter rules as well as not being able to fire at anything under 30 cm.

So lances are what makes a ship truly a threat against another ship and is a central component of what really makes a ship a proper gunship.

[BaronIveagh]

Do the math. At 30,000 km, the equivalent of 30 cm, it should last a 10th of a second at least. For 60,000 km, 1/5th of a second. Definitely more than microseconds.

By the numbers, I believe you're talking about range and the speed of light.  The problem is that the lance would not have to be continuously transmitted the entire time it takes to reach it's target.  

So do you use a FM in your fleet? And you're actually confirming for us that it is the weapon mounted on cap ships (the Koenigstiger) instead of the Escort (the Opel Blitz) which is dangerous which is what we have been pointing out all along. The whole package as you say. Tada. Thank you for playing.

Um D'art, an 88 mounted on a blitz can't move and fire.  You have to stop, get out, and set up the gun on it's carrage.  The King Tiger is the fast, maneuverable one, in this case, since it can chase you down with it.  

And I don't have a Space Marine fleet.

[/quote]

[Admiral_d_Artagnan]

By the numbers, I believe you're talking about range and the speed of light.  The problem is that the lance would not have to be continuously transmitted the entire time it takes to reach it's target.  

And you are saying that because? Note that the lance also has to damage. It has to puncture the outer hull's armor which is in no way weak. So actually the lance should fire for at least a second just so it can have that oompf! factor to punch through the outer hull then still have enough energy to damage the inside of a ship.

Um D'art, an 88 mounted on a blitz can't move and fire.  You have to stop, get out, and set up the gun on it's carrage.  The King Tiger is the fast, maneuverable one, in this case, since it can chase you down with it.  

And I don't have a Space Marine fleet.

You're missing the point aren't you? The Blitz is not a true war chariot even though it can be used just that it would be tedious and so would not be a threat similar to Escorts (though with a little ingenuity, cutters, welders and metal plate I think the 88 can be mounted and operate in the rear). The 88 can still hurt if the weapon hits as you pointed out, just like the lances. But having the weapon on a proper platform, it would be certainly most dangerous. The Koenigstiger is a proper platform equivalent of a capital ship.  As you point out, it is most threatening. That is your analogy, not mine.