August 05, 2024, 05:26:14 AM

Author Topic: Space Marines - Redesign/Rules Development  (Read 263549 times)

Offline Sigoroth

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1386
Re: Space Marines - Redesign/Rules Development
« Reply #660 on: December 16, 2010, 03:40:24 PM »
@Sig: And yet, they do!

Again, this is EXACTLY what it states in fluff:

"Although utterly loyal to the Emperor, the Black Templars are at the extreme end of Independence from Imperial authorities, verging on a rogue element.  Their fleet based nature and the goals of their 10,000 year crusade take the Black Templars throughout the galaxy, and it is primarily the will of their Marshals that send them to war.  Like all Space Marines, they do not consider themselves subject to Imperial rule, and each Crusade is effectively an autonomous fighting force, though they may choose to respond to requests for aid made by others in their vicinity (as happened during the Armageddon Crusade)." - Codex: Black Templars, pg 9.

Firstly, this does not say that they have warfleets. Secondly, the reason why an accurate census cannot be taken of the BT numbers is because they're always moving and always split up. This is, in effect, identical to being separated into different chapters anyway. Despite which there are still Imperial agents actively investigating them to try to find evidence of their perfidy.

Quote
And, I might point out, the problem you are having is right there: 40k HAS no internal consistency since GW changes fluff every new edition of 40k that comes out.  

So, the question becomes why the FUCK would we pay one iota of attention to crap fluff made by fanboy morons that don't even understand the basic premises and constraints of the fictional universe in which everything is set?

Quote
And, bluntly, you have not offered up any fluff proof at all of your position other then the oddly worded entry in Armada and your interpretation of another.  I've produced excerpts from a dozen sources so far, all published by GW that support my position.

What I have offered up, and which you have not, is the only possible way in which the 40k universe could work. Otherwise any fucktard could make up whatever fluff they wanted and play that.

The God-Emperor of Mankind sits up from his deck chair, and while reaching for another Martini suddenly clicks on how to defeat the powers of Chaos once and for all but unfortunately is killed by a rampaging toothpick wielding Gretchin before he can enact his plan. All Imperial ships, aircraft, vehicles, men, dogs and children (though not women) benefit from a 5+ Eldar holofield save.

If you're not willing to throw out bad fluff then there is no such thing as a fluff justification. It simply becomes meaningless. In which case we can just say no lances for SMs because we don't like SM fanboys that argue for lances for SMs.

Offline BaronIveagh

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 859
    • Dark Reign
Re: Space Marines - Redesign/Rules Development
« Reply #661 on: December 16, 2010, 04:04:59 PM »
Firstly, this does not say that they have warfleets. Secondly, the reason why an accurate census cannot be taken of the BT numbers is because they're always moving and always split up. This is, in effect, identical to being separated into different chapters anyway. Despite which there are still Imperial agents actively investigating them to try to find evidence of their perfidy.


I didn't say they had warfleets.  My point was that people were insisting that A) Space Marines cannot build thigns for themselves and B) that all space marines could not be independent of other imperial organizations such as admech.  BT do not follow the codex, and are more or les a law unto themselves.  the idea that they would stop their crusade to turn in their ships while the admech stripped off any lances they might have is rather absurd.

As they do not depend on other imperial organizations, they would, by necessity, have to maintain their own lines of supply, which would include occasionally replacing ships lost to attrition.  If Rogue Traders can (and have, in fluff) build their own private shipyards beyond the Imperium where they do things that the admech would FREAK OUT over like grafting xenotech into Imperial ships, obviously the knowledge of how to build a starship is not as secret as you seem to think.  

So, the question becomes why the FUCK would we pay one iota of attention to crap fluff made by fanboy morons that don't even understand the basic premises and constraints of the fictional universe in which everything is set?


Flaming GW authors in general does not support your position, since one of them was Andy Chambers.

What I have offered up, and which you have not, is the only possible way in which the 40k universe could work. Otherwise any fucktard could make up whatever fluff they wanted and play that.

The God-Emperor of Mankind sits up from his deck chair, and while reaching for another Martini suddenly clicks on how to defeat the powers of Chaos once and for all but unfortunately is killed by a rampaging toothpick wielding Gretchin before he can enact his plan. All Imperial ships, aircraft, vehicles, men, dogs and children (though not women) benefit from a 5+ Eldar holofield save.

If you're not willing to throw out bad fluff then there is no such thing as a fluff justification. It simply becomes meaningless. In which case we can just say no lances for SMs because we don't like SM fanboys that argue for lances for SMs.

Bad fluff, sure.  However, since bad fluff would be the one at odds with the bulk of available sources, however...

And, bluntly, there was once a rather amusing piece of fluff where the administratum and the Inquistion tried to determine how the Administratum could possibly work.  Their determination was that it didn't.  

Trying to apply logic to 40k is a fools errand.  After all, if Space Marines implants worked in the manner described, they would not be superhuman, they'd be dead.  If the mass/volume fluff for IN starships is correct, you would not need a powerfist to reach out and tear off a chunk of bulkhead, the damn things densities are so low they'd float on water.

The arraignment of their weapons makes no sense in a 'real' space environment, as you could simply attack them from underneath  (The kroot are apparently the only race in 40k to even have the vaguest idea what a space warship would probably look like.) and throw in daemons and magic into the mix and logic dies horribly.
« Last Edit: December 16, 2010, 04:06:41 PM by BaronIveagh »
non nobis domine non nobis sed nomine tua da na glorium

Offline commander

  • Active Member
  • *
  • Posts: 179
Re: Space Marines - Redesign/Rules Development
« Reply #662 on: December 16, 2010, 07:29:25 PM »
And all these pages for or against lances, which they can have if they pay for it ??? Pricey, yes, but that's the fate of everything special/rare.

Offline lastspartacus

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1279
Re: Space Marines - Redesign/Rules Development
« Reply #663 on: December 16, 2010, 07:35:42 PM »
Except 20 points isnt a premium, its a joke.  It would be acceptable at 10 points, but I'd rather just see the option for free, and more limited.
Say, one for every 3 ships, or better yet, one per 750 to 1000 points.  That takes care of the rarity issue. 
The statement 'no lances on capital SM ships ever' is a stupid one, with no basis whatsover with the variety and dispersal of chapters in 40k, and the proof in the Nova that SM chafe against the lance policy.

Offline horizon

  • Moderator
  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 4197
  • Destiny Infinity Eternity
Re: Space Marines - Redesign/Rules Development
« Reply #664 on: December 16, 2010, 08:25:44 PM »
Yes, 1 lance for 20pts is a perfect representation of the background.

LS, no lances on SM capitalships except vbb's. :)

And did you read the fluff from the Nova Frigate how rare it is and how closely it is being watched?

Offline lastspartacus

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1279
Re: Space Marines - Redesign/Rules Development
« Reply #665 on: December 16, 2010, 08:53:52 PM »
Quote that fluff source about the cap ships, Horizon.  I think its just how you feel about it, and since there's no hard fluff to back up the 'no not ever' argument, I say let the SM players have limited lances, if they want that INFERIOR option, without such stupidly wrong points costs.
Unless I misunderstand and you are arguing for some additional lance for 20 points, rather than 20 points and a str3 BC.

I read the fluff on the Nova.
'RARE in MOST chapters'.  'A trend the...would dearly love to see continue.'
Pretty soft wording for the interpretation you are getting from it.

Offline Admiral_d_Artagnan

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1037
Re: Space Marines - Redesign/Rules Development
« Reply #666 on: December 16, 2010, 10:37:54 PM »
Stone aged tribesmen managed to mine enough metal to build the Lord Daros in 11 years.  One would imagine that a SM chapter could build a smaller ship faster.  And, again, fluff states that SM do have the facilities to make their own ships.  This is not a 'Well maybe...' issue, fluff is clear on this subject (for once). Both Dark Angels (another fleet based chapter) and Ultramarines are stated, not in a suggestive sort of maybe manner, but clearly(!) to have their own production facilities manned by chapter serfs.

Mining. Where AM order the tribesmen to get the metal. Which is simple enough to do. But then what do they do with the metal? Why someone gets it and transports it to orbit where it is now processed by those in the know. Really, Baron, if you are not in the know, don't force it. I'm an engineer. I know the difficulties about building something and building a ship is not simple as you seem to think, especially with restrictions of knowledge in place.

Fleet based chapter does not mean fleet production facilities. Rather it means the Chapter is heavily reliant on its fleet. Incorporating this into 40k fluff, it means the Chapter is supported by the AM because of how the internal dynamics work.

As far as how such a facility might work in a chapter fleet, I'll use the provinder ship Bountiful Beast as an example.  The Beast is 16 km long, having a volume 111 times that of a strike cruiser, and is of a hull class frequently used in Imperial Crusades as a mass conveyance of victuals, according to fluff (yes, this makes it twice the length of an Emperor class battleship, but those are it's canon stats).  One would not have a hard time imagining a hull this size made into a mobile dockyard for cruisers and escorts.

Sure and the concept is legit but who, WHO, are the people manning the dockyard? No it's not the BTs.

And again, we're looking at just replacing ships lost to attrition, not building a fleet from scratch.

Provide your definition of replace. Is it building a new ship? If so, I do not see the difference between replacing ships lost to attrition and building a ship from scratch.

@D'Art

BT fluff from Games Workshop.  You know, the font of all official fluff?  Pick up a copy of something called Codex: Black Templars.  Very interesting stuff in the fluff section at the beginning of the book.

Uh huh and please point out to me where it says they build their own ships WITHOUT aid from the AM.

Oh, and there was a BT fleet list once upon a time from Ray.  Not official, but interesting enough.

And so entirely irrelevant to this debate.

The Land Raider Crusader was not just a weapon refit of the existing landraider, as it also has expanded troop carrying ability, which implies extensive internal reconfigurations.  

Yes, it's called removal of the power source of the Lascannon. Tadaaaa! Instant space. And veeeeeeery easy enough to do. Now if it were the reverse and the LRC was in existence and you now had to PUT the power source in for lascannons, that is now a much different situation. That is much harder to do.

As far as that reactor goes, it depends on where the hole is if all it needs is some fast welding.  However, most things beyond that, as I stated before, will need some knowledge of how it actually works to fix it, even with a quick and dirty repair, particularly nukes (See K-19).  Hell, anything electronic, or even some just electrical things, you WILL need to know how it works to fix it, even a quick and dirty repair.

Fix. FIX. Which is different from BUILD. Are you getting this through your head yet? K19 involved activating the failsafes to prevent a futher deterioration of the reactor which would result in the ship blowing up and the loss of everyone on board involved by rotating a valve (simple enough to do), the knowledge of which came from one of the commanding officers of K19.

« Last Edit: December 16, 2010, 10:46:27 PM by Admiral_d_Artagnan »

Offline BaronIveagh

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 859
    • Dark Reign
Re: Space Marines - Redesign/Rules Development
« Reply #667 on: December 17, 2010, 01:32:30 AM »
Mining. Where AM order the tribesmen to get the metal. Which is simple enough to do. But then what do they do with the metal? Why someone gets it and transports it to orbit where it is now processed by those in the know. Really, Baron, if you are not in the know, don't force it. I'm an engineer. I know the difficulties about building something and building a ship is not simple as you seem to think, especially with restrictions of knowledge in place.

Fleet based chapter does not mean fleet production facilities. Rather it means the Chapter is heavily reliant on its fleet. Incorporating this into 40k fluff, it means the Chapter is supported by the AM because of how the internal dynamics work.

And, again, I love that superior streak of yours.  First, your 'restricted knowledge' isn't very restricted if any half assed rogue trader can set up a private ship yard somewhere and commit tech heresy.  And, yes, the part where obviously more then JUST the miners were involved.  My point was not that they were the only ones building it, but that the facilities to do so would be primitive at best, probably a mobile drydock.


Sure and the concept is legit but who, WHO, are the people manning the dockyard? No it's not the BTs.


I would suggest the chapter serfs, as, after all, that's how the Ultramarines do it.

Provide your definition of replace. Is it building a new ship? If so, I do not see the difference between replacing ships lost to attrition and building a ship from scratch.

The assertion was that the Black Templars would not have the resources to build ships on a large scale.  While this may to may not be true, there is a difference of scale between gathering enough materials to build a single ship and to build a dozen.  Replacing losses is easy from a resource management standpoint then building a whole new fleet from scratch.

Uh huh and please point out to me where it says they build their own ships WITHOUT aid from the AM.

Since there is no data to prove or disprove this absolute, I cannot disprove your assertion, just as you cannot disprove mine.  It is 'implied' that this is the case, but it is not 'stated' one way or the other.

Yes, it's called removal of the power source of the Lascannon. Tadaaaa! Instant space. And veeeeeeery easy enough to do. Now if it were the reverse and the LRC was in existence and you now had to PUT the power source in for lascannons, that is now a much different situation. That is much harder to do.

You obviously have never owned an armored vehicle or tried to modify one.  Since you're leaving out that you have to add a shotlocker for the bolters, among other things.  For an engineer, you missed a really obvious problem there.  Since, you know, sufficient ammunition storage would require just as much, if not more, room then two generators.  I would suggest that other things were changed as well.

Fix. FIX. Which is different from BUILD. Are you getting this through your head yet? K19 involved activating the failsafes to prevent a futher deterioration of the reactor which would result in the ship blowing up and the loss of everyone on board involved by rotating a valve (simple enough to do), the knowledge of which came from one of the commanding officers of K19.

Um, wrong.  On both counts, really, but particularly the K-19.

The backup unit had never been installed.  They had to cut off a air vent valve and weld a pipe from the subs fresh water supply to it, cooling the runaway reactor.  Once again, knowing how something works is what allowed them to mange a temporary repair.

And, frankly, again, if you are going to fix, patch, jury rig or Micky Mouse something, you need to know what it does, and how it works.  I've seen people who did not know what they were doing try to 'fix' equipment in the past without knowing how it operated, and usually it just made the problem worse.

non nobis domine non nobis sed nomine tua da na glorium

Offline Admiral_d_Artagnan

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1037
Re: Space Marines - Redesign/Rules Development
« Reply #668 on: December 17, 2010, 01:55:39 AM »
And, again, I love that superior streak of yours.  First, your 'restricted knowledge' isn't very restricted if any half assed rogue trader can set up a private ship yard somewhere and commit tech heresy.  And, yes, the part where obviously more then JUST the miners were involved.  My point was not that they were the only ones building it, but that the facilities to do so would be primitive at best, probably a mobile drydock.

Uh huh and when said RT is found out then what happens? Aside from which said RT most likely will have assistance from other races. Not so SM. The point of the miners is that mining is not a difficult process to do. Miners can just DIG for the material, not even the most important ore. Digging is SIMPLE.


I would suggest the chapter serfs, as, after all, that's how the Ultramarines do it.

You haven't produced anything which shows they do the actual building, BT or UM. Let's face it, fluffwise, AM handles the building of warships.

The assertion was that the Black Templars would not have the resources to build ships on a large scale.  While this may to may not be true, there is a difference of scale between gathering enough materials to build a single ship and to build a dozen.  Replacing losses is easy from a resource management standpoint then building a whole new fleet from scratch.

No, the assertation is the BT do not have the technical knowledge to build such ships. Resources (raw materials) they will most likely have. How to transform such raw materials in a warship, they do not. Again, define what you man by "replace".

Since there is no data to prove or disprove this absolute, I cannot disprove your assertion, just as you cannot disprove mine.  It is 'implied' that this is the case, but it is not 'stated' one way or the other.

No, I have proof from the fluff based on the background of the 40k universe. You do not have any proof whatsoever. You made the assertation that BT can build ships without AM assistance. As such it is you who has to present the proof they can. All you have provided is that BT are fleet based which does not mean they build their own ships. You present proof that they have fleets which is not being contradicted here. The issue here is can they build ships without AM assistance. You have not provided any proof whatsoever.

You obviously have never owned an armored vehicle or tried to modify one.  Since you're leaving out that you have to add a shotlocker for the bolters, among other things.  For an engineer, you missed a really obvious problem there.  Since, you know, sufficient ammunition storage would require just as much, if not more, room then two generators.  I would suggest that other things were changed as well.

I know adding shotlockers to Bolters would be easier than adding a power source for something as complicated as a Lascannon. That is a simple problem of layout. How to place the Bolters in such a way as to feed the Hurricane Bolters which are simple weapons at best. Oh yes I DO UNDERSTAND the complexities involved, especially as an ENGINEER.

Um, wrong.  On both counts, really, but particularly the K-19.

The backup unit had never been installed.  They had to cut off a air vent valve and weld a pipe from the subs fresh water supply to
it, cooling the runaway reactor.  Once again, knowing how something works is what allowed them to mange a temporary repair.

Exactly, a temporary repair which I never said the BTs or any engineer could not do. But repairs are different from BUILDING something. If you cannot get the difference between REPAIRING and BUILDING, then it's useless to discuss things further.

Regarding K19, while it had no backups, there were still failsafes on board which could have assisted in minimizing the problem. These failsafes failed which resulted in the required fabricating of a pipe to direct water to cool down the problem reactor. K-19s problem was simple: how to cool down the reactor (note that I said simple, though this in no way downplays the seriousness of the problem). Making a pipe to divert water from another source on the ship is a simple solution as well.

And, frankly, again, if you are going to fix, patch, jury rig or Micky Mouse something, you need to know what it does, and how it works.  I've seen people who did not know what they were doing try to 'fix' equipment in the past without knowing how it operated, and usually it just made the problem worse.

Again we're not talking about repairs in the case of BT but building ships. Yes, as I said, Techmarines will have some general knowledge to help repair. Building something is another issue entirely. If you don't believe me, go build yourself a ship like a Nimitz class. Heck, you can even watch the building of one in Discovery Channel if you can catch it when they do re-runs or get a copy.
« Last Edit: December 17, 2010, 03:22:43 AM by Admiral_d_Artagnan »

Offline Sigoroth

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1386
Re: Space Marines - Redesign/Rules Development
« Reply #669 on: December 17, 2010, 04:54:17 AM »
If you, as a person, think that Space Marines should be allowed lances on SCs or BBs, given the political situation, then you, as a person, are a retard.

40K logic not lining up with real world logic? Fine. Hand waive it. Who gives a flying fuck. What you are doing here is the equivalent of saying that Space Marines have the best armour and weapons available to the Imperium and then giving them a 6+ armour save and a lasgun. Learn the difference between external and internal consistency. There is zero fluff that could support the notion that SMs have lances. If a piece of fluff came right out and said "Such-and-such chapter have a plethora of pure lance armed SCs and BBs and the Imperium lets them" then that fluff would simply be WRONG.

The vast majority of these guys that put pen to paper to create the fluff are just writing what they think would be thematic or dramatic or cool or nasty or whatthefuckever. They have no concept of what the pre-established political situation requires. It might be cool for Eldar to carve off a sizeable chunk of the Imperium, establish their own Empire and slay Slaanesh, but if some dickhead were to write it I wouldn't buy it.

If you follow every bit of fluff as gospel, regardless of source and regardless of its internal consistency then you're a moron. That's all there is to it. There is an ordinal supremacy here:

1. Premises of fictional universe
2. Specific historical incidences


Your assertion of lances for SMs runs against the premises. Even if your fluff stated specifically that they have lances and was from a reputable (ie, otherwise acceptable) source then it would still be wrong. That's even if it were straight out and from a reputable source, let alone these veiled inferences you bring up. It is wrong, you are wrong. There is no other way it can be.

Now, you could make up some sort of fluff whereby the SM chapter of the moment manages to maintain/build lance boats in secret, but as soon as they're discovered they're going to be either brought back into line or, more likely, simply exterminated. Building warships is an act of open rebellion. Lance boats are warships. That's it. End of fucking story. Buh-bye, thanks for playing. I don't know how to make it any clearer to you. There is no alternative scenario. You cannot simultaneously hold that the Heresy happened and that SMs should get lances. They are mutually exclusive.

The option that currently exists should only be available to those chapters that are about to be struck by the great Imperial nerfhammer. In other words, you take the lance option, you're now a chapter in rebellion. You get caught with it, you're screwed.

Offline BaronIveagh

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 859
    • Dark Reign
Re: Space Marines - Redesign/Rules Development
« Reply #670 on: December 17, 2010, 05:37:59 AM »
Uh huh and when said RT is found out then what happens? Aside from which said RT most likely will have assistance from other races. Not so SM. The point of the miners is that mining is not a difficult process to do. Miners can just DIG for the material, not even the most important ore. Digging is SIMPLE.

Well, not a whole lot, apparently.  Since they regularly take xenos systems without taking Imperial fire, though I would not be surprised if the Admech were miffed at them.   Oh, and, I don't think that the Eldar or the Fra'al or the Yuvath have conveniently located shipyards for any Rogue trader to just pull into and start refitting.  Remember, most races are not the Tau or the Stryxis.  You also leave out all the wrecking operations that go on, which ALSO require extensive knowledge of how a ship goes together.  

You haven't produced anything which shows they do the actual building, BT or UM. Let's face it, fluffwise, AM handles the building of warships.

Again, Nightbringer, Chapter 4.  The Vae Victus was built at Calth by the Ultramarines, several centuries previous to the beginning of the novel.  I've site this source twice now.  

No, the assertation is the BT do not have the technical knowledge to build such ships. Resources (raw materials) they will most likely have. How to transform such raw materials in a warship, they do not. Again, define what you man by "replace".

Site a source that says they have no technical knowledge.  I've sited several that they do.  (One would hope that in a 30 year apprenticeship the tech marines in particular would have gone beyond bolt tightening.  After all, it only takes 10 to be an engineer)

No, I have proof from the fluff based on the background of the 40k universe. You do not have any proof whatsoever. You made the assertation that BT can build ships without AM assistance. As such it is you who has to present the proof they can. All you have provided is that BT are fleet based which does not mean they build their own ships. You present proof that they have fleets which is not being contradicted here. The issue here is can they build ships without AM assistance. You have not provided any proof whatsoever.

A simple one would be that the AdMech would have refused to alter the Eternal Crusader from it's holy STC design.  Since this alteration did take place, it would have to have been without the assistance of the AdMech, and, as the ship is a Battlebarge, would have required extensive facilities to carry out, and highly trained shipwrights.

and, I might point out that you have not sited a single source other then to make vague statements about '40k background'.


I know adding shotlockers to Bolters would be easier than adding a power source for something as complicated as a Lascannon. That is a simple problem of layout. How to place the Bolters in such a way as to feed the Hurricane Bolters which are simple weapons at best. Oh yes I DO UNDERSTAND the complexities involved, especially as an ENGINEER.

Really?  Then you'd know that a series of six synchronized ammo feeds (per side) are a lot harder to pull off them a single high voltage connection and a group of capacitors.  Further, the feeds would require a precise timing mechanism to feed the ammunition into the bolters without fouling, which would be rather complicated as it fires six bolters at once. A lascannon is complicated (sort of, well, not really, assuming that it's just a very powerful laser) within the weapon itself, rather then the ancillary mechanisms to operate it.

Exactly, a temporary repair which I never said the BTs or any engineer could not do. But repairs are different from BUILDING something. If you cannot get the difference between REPAIRING and BUILDING, then it's useless to discuss things further.

Regarding K19, while it had no backups, there were still failsafes on board which could have assisted in minimizing the problem. These failsafes failed which resulted in the required fabricating of a pipe to direct water to cool down the problem reactor. K-19s problem was simple: how to cool down the reactor (note that I said simple, though this in no way downplays the seriousness of the problem). Making a pipe to divert water from another source on the ship is a simple solution as well.

I'm not sure why you seem to think they're two separate things.  I know, at least in my field, they're exactly the same skills.  And, as John Staph, one of the men that built the Triton missile, told me, 'You need to know how to build one to know how to fix one.'

And, btw: you'd have to know that the air intake connects in a manner that would direct the coolant into the proper location, instead of, say, flooding the boat.  Further, the only failsafe was SCRAM, which simply inserts all the control rods.  SCRAM worked perfectly, however, without any coolant in the system, SCRAM doesn't do too much to prevent a meltdown.

However, that wasn't what you said they did the first time.

Again we're not talking about repairs in the case of BT but building ships. Yes, as I said, Techmarines will have some general knowledge to help repair. Building something is another issue entirely. If you don't believe me, go build yourself a ship like a Nimitz class. Heck, you can even watch the building of one in Discovery Channel if you can catch it when they do re-runs or get a copy.

While I doubt I could build myself a Nimitz (without being arrested, plutonium requires a license) I could, however, build you a nice unmanned drone carrier with a more conventional propulsion system (I'm fond of the Babcox and Wilcox non-explosive boiler, myself.  It's not as efficient, but any idiot can be trained to operate it, and if something goes wrong, there's no issues with all that Strontium 90).  And some drones, though nothing as well armed or fast as the USG's toys.  Or any number of cute civilian ships.   Assuming you want to drop the money on me to get all the materials I need.


@Sigorath: So, to summarize, what you're saying is "If it doesn't agree with MY interpretation of things in a fictional universe, it's WRONG!"

 (And, by the way, once upon a time, SM could be equipped with lasguns)

Normally, I'd just let it go at that, but let me tear into your supposition further:

1) Premise of a fictional universe: 40,000 years in the future, the totalitarian Imperium of Mankind is in slow decline, as it teeters toward oblivion.  Existing power structures are under constant attack from both within and without, slowly crumbing under their own inertia while the Inquisition tries to hold it all together [and occasionally disturbing things best left undisturbed] and the IG and SM run around pissing on fires.  

(Anyone want to argue that this is not 40k?)


2) Historical Incidents: I've already covered this ground fairly well.  

Point me to where the Inquisition is going to say "Despite you being the only thing standing between us and (species/invasion/heresy here) Space Marine, kneel down to be executed because we feel you're too powerful.  We don't mind losing the sector over this and possibly starting another Badab War."

The High Lords of Terra have so little concern about space marines they don't even know how many chapters there are.  That a single chapter sized an entire sector of space was of little concern, until they didn't pay their taxes for 150 years.  And even then, it was only because several space marines chapters got into a private shooting war that the Inquisition even noticed.  

Fluff states that the High Lords spend a great deal more time worrying about one another, and their own power hungry subordinates, then about space marines (After all, to fill someone's shoes, you must first empty them) and that, in fact, this is the reason they grant so many Writs of Trade, to dispose of useful people that are making them nervous without having to kill them.

Further, when an Empire reaches this level of decline, typically their ability to enforce their will starts to diminish rapidly in far flung areas and on groups only nominally under thier control. (See Gibbon's Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire)
« Last Edit: December 17, 2010, 05:49:55 AM by BaronIveagh »
non nobis domine non nobis sed nomine tua da na glorium

Offline horizon

  • Moderator
  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 4197
  • Destiny Infinity Eternity
Re: Space Marines - Redesign/Rules Development
« Reply #671 on: December 17, 2010, 06:40:08 AM »
Okay okay, I give in.

I'll stop bitchin about no lances at all. Giving them 1 lance for +20pts instead of prow Bombardment Cannons is fine.

<grin>

Offline Sigoroth

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1386
Re: Space Marines - Redesign/Rules Development
« Reply #672 on: December 17, 2010, 08:50:12 AM »
@Sigorath: So, to summarize, what you're saying is "If it doesn't agree with MY interpretation of things in a fictional universe, it's WRONG!"

Absolutely. When my interpretation is the only cogent interpretation.

Quote
(And, by the way, once upon a time, SM could be equipped with lasguns)

Hmm, and now they can't. I wonder why? Could it be that some bright spark realised how stupid that idea was? How it didn't line up with the premises regarding SMs? I think so.

Quote
Normally, I'd just let it go at that, but let me tear into your supposition further:

1) Premise of a fictional universe: 40,000 years in the future, the totalitarian Imperium of Mankind is in slow decline, as it teeters toward oblivion.  Existing power structures are under constant attack from both within and without, slowly crumbing under their own inertia while the Inquisition tries to hold it all together [and occasionally disturbing things best left undisturbed] and the IG and SM run around pissing on fires.  

(Anyone want to argue that this is not 40k?)

This is an incomplete picture. You left out that the slightest deviation from accepted practice is heresy. That tinkering with your own machines without the authority of the AdMech is heresy. That execution is the solution of choice. That paranoia abounds in all forms. And that the most psychologically traumatic event in all of human history was the space marine rebellion!

Quote
2) Historical Incidents: I've already covered this ground fairly well.  

Point me to where the Inquisition is going to say "Despite you being the only thing standing between us and (species/invasion/heresy here) Space Marine, kneel down to be executed because we feel you're too powerful.  We don't mind losing the sector over this and possibly starting another Badab War."

Well, this would be under oh, I don't know, every single piece of Inquisition fluff ever written!. The Imperium are arrogant and bureaucratic and above all else paranoid. Paranoid. They don't trust the SMs to just go off and do the right thing. What they do trust is their bureaucracy. They have faith in the Emperor and in the might of the Imperium. One small portion of which, ie, the SM chapter they happen to be looking at, cannot be allowed to threaten. What the Badab war would have taught the Imperium is that they can't trust SMs at all and that they need to control them more. The one thing they fear more than anything is another Heresy on the scale of Horus's. That's why they split them up in the first place, so the heresy couldn't spread so easily. Therefore when they spot it they can uproot it easily.

So despite them splitting them up for this very reason, despite them denying the SMs a warfleet to deliberately limit their power you're saying that they, the Highlords and the Inquisition, really couldn't give a rats arse about whether SMs get a warfleet or have numbers on the scale of the old legions. No, you're right, that makes absolute sense. It's not as if the Horus Heresy redefined the lives of every single human in the empire or anything. Oh wait ...

Quote
The High Lords of Terra have so little concern about space marines they don't even know how many chapters there are.  That a single chapter sized an entire sector of space was of little concern, until they didn't pay their taxes for 150 years.  And even then, it was only because several space marines chapters got into a private shooting war that the Inquisition even noticed.  

Wow. You really don't get it do you. It doesn't matter how many chapters there are. In fact, the more the better. The more chapters the less cohesion. All they'd give a rats about is whether the SMs have a warfleet that could challenge the IN or, more pertinently, whether it looked like one might happen. The next issue down, and this one is a distant second, is the size of the individual chapters. SMs don't breed at a prodigious rate and yet there are more chapters popping up all the time. So they're all split up, job sorted. The only real chapter noted as not obeying this rule is the BT, and they're only suspected. If they never gather enough men in the one spot for it to be confirmed then they're not likely a threat. Still, they're watched.

Quote
Fluff states that the High Lords spend a great deal more time worrying about one another, and their own power hungry subordinates, then about space marines (After all, to fill someone's shoes, you must first empty them) and that, in fact, this is the reason they grant so many Writs of Trade, to dispose of useful people that are making them nervous without having to kill them.

So they actually do nothing while they're in office and have no concerns other than political intrigue with their near rivals. The idea of revolution is so distant to them that they're not even afraid of it at all. After all, it has never happened before, right? Oh wait ...

Also, the reason they don't worry about SMs is likely because when it comes to the important stuff they do mainly tow the line. SMs don't even want lances on their ships. They know their place, and that's on the ground, in the front lines, with some xenos races blood on their armour.

Quote
Further, when an Empire reaches this level of decline, typically their ability to enforce their will starts to diminish rapidly in far flung areas and on groups only nominally under thier control. (See Gibbon's Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire)

You go pick up any psychology text on power. Anyway, your example only supports my case. The Romans, ever fearful of someone of power (ie, a SM chapter master) taking over used to ban Generals from bringing their armies into Rome (hence we get the saying, crossing the Rubicon). Eventually they fell prey to their own Praetorian guard, but only due to some other political slips beforehand. Up until this time it was a wise provision in and of itself, but regardless, even when it became unwise it was still enforced. Emperor after Emperor was beholden to the Praetorian guard, a mere puppet. A relieving army would've been a wonderful idea then.

Even in decline the ideas and practices are still followed, regardless of whether that hastens your decline. Hell, at the end of WWII the yanks decided to go through France rather than the Baltic states as advocated by Churchill. The yanks were afraid of British imperialistic intentions and ignored Churchills fears of the Russians advancing their borders and becoming a superpower. Policy decisions are made by fear. The single greatest fear the Imperium has is being betrayed by their own SMs. More than any xenos threat, their own troops are their biggest threat. As the Imperium of Man declines, and its ability to exert its influence wanes it will contract its borders to a size it can control, and within those borders they would still exert control in the same manner, ie, no SM gunboats. They might even escalate their paranoia such that they try to systematically exterminate remaining SM forces from space once they feel they can no longer control them. They would not adapt, they would not risk giving over control of space to the marines.

Two things here. We're not at that point yet and even if we were the only SMs allowed lances would be those outside of the Imperiums controllable borders. In other words, ex-Space Marines. Well, you want to give your ex-Space Marines lances, go ahead. That's perfectly allowable.

Offline Octavius_Maximus

  • Lurker
  • *
  • Posts: 1
Re: Space Marines - Redesign/Rules Development
« Reply #673 on: December 17, 2010, 02:40:37 PM »
While the Arguements both have their merits. Sigoroth, you seem to overstate the importance of Space Marines in the wider Imperial Theater. You say that the single most fear of the Imperial Brass is a Space Marine revolt, although while harsh i think it is more traitors in general.

A space Marine chapter can be devastating, but thats only if its a plot thing it seems. While Imperial Guard regiments, Imperial Ships, etc could all represent a greater threat due to their increased size and power.

The Badab war was another mass Space Marine Revolt (not on par with the Heresy, but still) which is still a footnote in all of Imperial History, which shows how insignificant it may be according to the Imperial Big Picture.

Not only that, but your classification of the Heresy as being a defining moment that changed the Imperium is true, although its relevance to the modern Imperium is, also, less than you state i believe. I would equate it the same importance to most Imperial Citizens as The fall of Lucifer does to the modern world. Its a story from a text, told to you endlessly, but still a story, not to mention those who dont believe vehemently .

But on the other topic, Space Marines not having lances can be a defining trait of theirs (like Orks, for example) and their Bombard Cannons are a good replacement. But if you are going to give Space Marines the options for lances, you CANNOT try to Produce fleets through overcharging for options. It is an Anathema to good game balance to try and incorporate fluff into the mechanics of the rules in such a hamfisted way. If you want to make Space Marines not take lances, you dont give them the option. A Option which is inherantly inbalanced and overcosted is an insult.

I would simply put that Space marines can replace their original Bombard Cannons with a St1 45cm range Lance (or a S2 30cm lance), for free. This means that you have:

Strike Cruiser:
Side Weapons Batteries (S4)
Prow Bombardment Cannons (S3)
Dorsal Launch bay (S1)

Variant 1:
Side Weapons Batteries (S4)
Prow Bombardment Cannons (S3)
Prow Bombardment cannons (S5)

Variant 2:
Side Weapons Batteries (S4)
Prow Lance (S2 30cm or S1 45cm)
Dorsal Launch Bay (S1)

Variant 3:
Side Weapons Batteries (S4)
Prow Lance (S2 30cm or S1 45cm)
Prow Bombardment cannons (S5)

You could even add in a mass launch bay variant.

Offline horizon

  • Moderator
  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 4197
  • Destiny Infinity Eternity
Re: Space Marines - Redesign/Rules Development
« Reply #674 on: December 17, 2010, 02:44:01 PM »
Hi,
Quote
I would simply put that Space marines can replace their original Bombard Cannons with a St1 45cm range Lance (or a S2 30cm lance), for free. This means that you have:
Yeah... 45cm lances for Marines. Ya better edit that idea.... ;)

Also, per draft SC has 2 launch bays, so with 1 per your suggestion you go for 2 shields per standard?