I am not going to stop pounding you with the established facts until you stop ignoring them.
Yes, i hate space marines as a concept, but i have a very large fleet of them and enjoy playing them a great deal.
One of the reasons why I enjoy BFG is that space marines are NOT important on this scale, and it annoys me when people scream to make them just as tricked out as they are in 40k.
No. your not getting lances. If you want them, take a reserve Gothic, take Nova frigates, or take a VBB from the FOC list.
Strike cruisers and barges are NOT getting lances. you have Bombardment cannons. Even if it's a 10cm lance that needs a 5 to hit, your not getting it.
What I find even more vulgar is that 20 bombardment cannons on a broadside is just not enough for you.
So to put it simply: You can't have it. your not getting it.
Reality and Zel have just parted company. (Since I might point out that I was one of the people complaining that SO is even
more powerful then it was when everyone complained that it was brokenly powerful.)
Zel, what facts, other then you hate space marines, have you established? While I grant that the primary role of a battlebarge is as a support platform for a ground assault, the fact that, by purpose and design, a Strike cruiser has to enter a potentially hot LZ with little to no intel on what they might be facing would be a very good reason for it to carry anti-ship weapons.
Every source I have been able to lay hands on, including Armada, states that the SC is usually the first imperial ship to enter a potentially hostile system and, like combat engineers on a beachhead, is supposed to clear the way for the IN fleet coming in behind them. The idea that they cannot mount anti-ship weapons, when their purpose is to subdue an area which may contain hostile ships, is an absurdity.
And why is it that people against improving SC all immediately claim to own a SM fleet and accuse their opponents of being SM fanboys? Neither statement advances the idea that SM do not have lances.