Space Marines - Redesign/Rules Development

[Sigoroth]

Once again: you are totally forgetting that the IN fleet at the time of the writing of Codex Astartes was not the IN fleet used 'today'.  The Inq DOES NOT go around telling SM chapters 'Well, IN got simpler/weaker again, so you have to throw out your priceless relics from your founding.'  One thing that Space Marines do take very seriously, in any and all fluff I have ever read, is the traditions of their chapters.

Firstly, you are still making no case for marines to have lances. Secondly, let's assume that, against the fleet of the day, the IN didn't care about lances and that they do care about lances now. This is NOT a reasonable assumption by the way. The fact is that, yes, they would very certainly demand that SMs surrender any lance armed ship for retrofitting to a more acceptable weapon system. The Inquisition don't order space marines about as far as how they run their fief or in the way they operate their crusades or deploy their ground forces. The High Lords of Terra however do have an agenda to keep SM fleets from getting too powerful and they have the might of the IN to back up their agenda and a paranoia of clinical proportions to ensure that this never comes about.

Space Marines may well have their own way in a lot of things. In space however, they are completely dominated by the IN. The IN are the law. No lances on space marine ships.

[Vaaish]

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. 

That means absolutely nothing in the context. Compare the stats of the gladius, which is noted as being the most numerous marine escort, with the nova, which is considered rare and problematic. The difference is one has a lance and the other does not. Use some logic and common sense to tell you what the IN has a problem with.

Now if that isn't enough, look at WHAT defines it as a menacing gunboat... let me quote: "its lance armament and speed make it a menacing gunboat in its own right."

[BaronIveagh]

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.

And would not have rivaled the slaughter which is, again, the ship they would have weighed it against.  Stop trying to use modern IN, it's not fluffy in this case.

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

I'd say that the common SFD Monitor is being heavily underestimated here.  +6 and two shields and turrets make a single monitor a tough nut for a SC or a nova to crack.  One on one, a nova killing it is nearly impossible, and they cost within 10 points of each other.

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

It would not be the first time they did exactly that.  Particularly the Minotaurs and the Space Wolves.

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).

Torps are anti-ship weapons, having no use in planetary landing support, and by your logic, prohibited.  BCs, at least for SC, are not a long range weapon, and are unsuitable for what you describe.

BCs are also powerful anti-ship weapons.  A lance only inflicts a critical hit 1/6th of the time, a BC does 50% of the time.  Since a critical hit represents massive internal damage to a ship...

"Bombardment cannons are equally devastating in ship-to-ship combat, capable of blasting apart any capital ship in just a few salvoes." Armada, Page 21.

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.

So, the Avenger is NOT a proper gunship, and not a 'true' threat to other ships, because it doesn't have lances, despite having a more powerful broadside then a Retribution class battleship?  

[BaronIveagh]

Firstly, you are still making no case for marines to have lances. Secondly, let's assume that, against the fleet of the day, the IN didn't care about lances and that they do care about lances now. This is NOT a reasonable assumption by the way. The fact is that, yes, they would very certainly demand that SMs surrender any lance armed ship for retrofitting to a more acceptable weapon system. The Inquisition don't order space marines about as far as how they run their fief or in the way they operate their crusades or deploy their ground forces. The High Lords of Terra however do have an agenda to keep SM fleets from getting too powerful and they have the might of the IN to back up their agenda and a paranoia of clinical proportions to ensure that this never comes about.

Space Marines may well have their own way in a lot of things. In space however, they are completely dominated by the IN. The IN are the law. No lances on space marine ships.

Ok, I'll state this: to talk inquisition makes it so that I cannot argue the point within the parameters that D'Art et al insist that I argue within, requiring that I refer to sources outside Blue Book and Armada.  I'm making the best case possible within the limitation that no other 40k material 'counts'.  

That aside: the Inquisition seems to by and large not have as much authority as you suggest over space marines, as, Lord Inquisitors, Rogue Traders, and Space Marines chapter masters are listed as the peers of the Imperium (meaning in the eyes of the Emperor, they're all more or less of the same rank.)  Typically, it seems that the Inquisition seeks out the approval of other space marine chapters or Imperial organizations when dealing with a 'rogue' chapter (See Souldrinkers books, IA on the Badab War, all fluff for the Relictors) in much the same way that IG Commissars hold tribunals when another commissar is charged with a crime.  

The only situation that the Inquisition acted on it's own was the Grey Knights assault on the Flame Falcons, though it could be argued that they are another space marine chapter as well as an Inquisitorial arm.  

When Space Marines feel their fellows are being treated unfairly by an Imperial Institution, situations like the Badab war happen, so IQ tends to treat SM with kid gloves. 

When relics of the chapters are sized, for whatever reason, you have a situation such as led the Souldrinkers down the path to rebellion against the Imperium.

[Sigoroth]

@BI

Torps do have a place. They can carry exterminatus warheads for one. Secondly they can be boarding torps, which is apropos of space marines and thirdly, they are better against static defences at extreme range than they are against things that can simply move out of the way.

Apart from that, you are not making the case for SMs to get lances. You are simply saying that denying the SMs lances is not all that the IN would have to do in order to keep them suppressed. This is true. They should also be denied pure gunships that could stand toe to toe with IN vessels. This is why they have undergunned and short ranged BBs and why they have no 8 hit line cruiser.

The weapons they do have either aid in their ground deployment or perform optimally against static defences, which is all they need. Lances are an anti-ship weapon. The only reason to take them would be to shoot ships with. This is because ships move, and have aspects and lances ignore this. Defences don't move. WBs and BCs perform extremely well against these. This is all the SMs need. They don't need a lance.

Now, as for notions that the SC is able to beat this or the BB can't be stopped except by that blah blah, well of course there are some concessions made, in the interests of making the game balanced and more interesting. Note however that we're talking a very expensive BB here, so there is balance in that the SMs will be outnumbered (you can get more Rets for points than BBs). However, there is no reason whatsoever why we would ever give Space Marines an anti-ship weapon. None. If we were talking pure fluff we might reduce SM firepower a bit further, making them little more than tough transports. We concede that players want to fight battles with fleets of space marine ships, rather than SM embarked IN ships, so we make it doable. But then why would we give them lances?

[Plaxor]

Gah! don't start the space marine vs. inquisitor argument. I've seen it too many times. An inquisitor has power to declare a chapter excommunicae. Power enough.

Although he probably doesn't necessarily have the power to tell SMs to do whatever he wants, they probably would. Inquisitors are the Imperium in idea, they are to enforce it's regulations.

Now there are a few accounts of sms going against inquisitors, but it isn't a normal thing for them. I.E. the space wolves refusing to be inducted into the deathwatch. Also likely an inquisitor would have to meet with a board of other members of the inquisition to explain his reasons for declaring a chapter excommunicae, to prevent it being done rashly.

Yes, some space marines could and probably do get away with having a lance on their SC, it could be for a plethora of reasons. Which is why I take the, 'it should only be overcosted enough to make it obviously not a good choice' idealogy.

[Sigoroth]

That aside: the Inquisition seems to by and large not have as much authority as you suggest over space marines, as, Lord Inquisitors, Rogue Traders, and Space Marines chapter masters are listed as the peers of the Imperium (meaning in the eyes of the Emperor, they're all more or less of the same rank.)  Typically, it seems that the Inquisition seeks out the approval of other space marine chapters or Imperial organizations when dealing with a 'rogue' chapter (See Souldrinkers books, IA on the Badab War, all fluff for the Relictors) in much the same way that IG Commissars hold tribunals when another commissar is charged with a crime.

I did not suggest that the Inquisition did have authority over the SMs, in fact I stipulated that they didn't. The High Lords of Terra do, however. They also directly control the IN, and it is with this hammer that they dominate the SMs. The SMs answer to the High Lords. They do not have the power to resist. This is why they were broken down into chapters and stripped of their warships.

[lastspartacus]

If you limit the lance variants taken, and make the tradeout option one of less overall use, why is there a need to also add in a points cost?
What does that accomplish?

[Sigoroth]

If you limit the lance variants taken, and make the tradeout option one of less overall use, why is there a need to also add in a points cost?
What does that accomplish?

It gives a lance option to all those that demanded it and yet ensures that no one will take it as they shouldn't or, if they do, they're punished for their stupidity. It's a cowards way out. It should simply be stated that no purpose built SM capital ship will fuckin EVER have a lance on it. Deal with it.

[Plaxor]

It gives a lance option to all those that demanded it and yet ensures that no one will take it as they shouldn't or, if they do, they're punished for their stupidity. It's a cowards way out. It should simply be stated that no purpose built SM capital ship will fuckin EVER have a lance on it. Deal with it.

I think the more Sigoroth has to talk the angrier he gets.

[lastspartacus]

Except you have no basis on which to make that statement, Sig.  

Limitating the amount taken to very small, on a tradeout with no net gain, is quite enough of a limitation.
Tacking on a large points cost on top of that is just seems mean spirited.

[BaronIveagh]

If you limit the lance variants taken, and make the tradeout option one of less overall use, why is there a need to also add in a points cost?
What does that accomplish?

It gives a lance option to all those that demanded it and yet ensures that no one will take it as they shouldn't or, if they do, they're punished for their stupidity. It's a cowards way out. It should simply be stated that no purpose built SM capital ship will fuckin EVER have a lance on it. Deal with it.

From the Rules for the Damocles Command Rhino:

" During large engagements the Space Marines can call upon the firepower of their orbiting Strike Cruisers or Battle Barge to lend heavy fire support. This is always a weapon of last resort, reserved only for the most dangerous of foes, as an orbital strike can be as dangerous for friendly forces in the area as it is for the enemy. "  

First option on the list?

'Lance Strike  70  10  1  Ordnance blast '

[Plaxor]

I think the argument is pointless now, everyone has their opinions and they are very hard to change over the internet. Especially if there is no cited evidence.

This isn't going anywhere. SMs have their lance, It's a POS. This argument is about a compromise that gave each side nothing, and in fact both sides probably lost something. Yes, even the side that gets the lance, because it is an insult to have to pay so much for it.

Oh and the lance strike on the Command Rhino was because it mimicked the already in place stats of the lance strike for daemonhunters. Now the current chapter master has orbital bombardment, a more appropriate thing.

[lastspartacus]

To be clear, I'm not sure if Baron is advocating widespread use of lances in the SM fleet, standard, or not.  But I'm certainly not.  
Limited, meh options.  But available if you wish to represent very specific fleets.

[BaronIveagh]

I think the argument is pointless now, everyone has their opinions and they are very hard to change over the internet. Especially if there is no cited evidence.

This isn't going anywhere. SMs have their lance, It's a POS. This argument is about a compromise that gave each side nothing, and in fact both sides probably lost something. Yes, even the side that gets the lance, because it is an insult to have to pay so much for it.

Oh and the lance strike on the Command Rhino was because it mimicked the already in place stats of the lance strike for daemonhunters. Now the current chapter master has orbital bombardment, a more appropriate thing.

That's nice, but it's still a fluff example of SM using lances on battlebarges and SC.  Another one would be, if anyone cares to watch the trailer for the new 'Space Marine' game, a (VERY POWERFUL) lance strike is called down by the Ultramarines from a strike cruiser.