The fact is that SMs do not need lances. They have bombardment cannon. The interaction between BC and WBs (ie, the placement of a BM) makes the two weapon systems less efficient against ships than WB + Lances. More efficient against static defences than WBs + Lances and more efficient against 6+ armour static defences than Lances + bombardment cannons when on LO.
Not really as effective if the defenses are squadroned. 150 pts of squadroned defenses (str 6 lance, str 12 60cm WB, str 6 torp) > 160 points of SC.
This is fluffy. The IN don't want the competition. Fluffy. SMs aren't meant to fight warfleets soooo ... fluffy. If they had lances then they would never have been given bombardment cannon. If they had lances this weapon would be removed from the game. It was only given to them as a replacement. A good thing too, since it is more fluffy this way. They already have a lance analogue, don't need lances.
Except, in fluff, they did and they were. And from fluff in rulebooks, even, neverminding the fluff from Battlefleet Gothic Magazine.
System Defence Monitors? Slow as crap, AAF past them, they'll never catch you, land the troops, you're good. Otherwise, um, Thunderhawks, you're good. Or, fuck it, board the prick. You're good. Even direct fire at close range when locked on could do the trick, which isn't bad when you consider how well defended the SDM is. This is just with 1 SC. Back it up with a couple of Novas or Hunters and you're good to take out anything but the most heavily defended of systems.
The fact is that SMs are supposed to deal with whatever they may find with the tools they've got at hand. They're not supposed to be given anti-ship weapons on the off chance that they run into a warfleet or they're too piss weak to deal with a few system defence ships.
3 SFM = Str 24 WB (f/l/r) and Str 3 lance (turret massing = 5 turrets) 180pts against 1 SC (str 2 sheilds) Str 4 wbs, str 3 bc, 2 thawks. 160pts
Yes, very weak. Particularly since they count as escorts on the gunnery table, so unless they're closing with you, you'll never have firepower greater then 2 against them, which is how many shields they have. Thawks getting through is a long shot, but possible. Given both sides ranges, they're going to get a left shift if you try to make the hit with them closing. You can board, but in the attempt the SC will probably get plastered by the other two defense monitors, and be in trouble if they successfully brace, or worse, roll higher then you do in the boarding attempt.
Now, swap that Str 2 BC for Str 2 lance: Now the SC can effectively deal with the SDMs without having to board them. It's still going to take a pounding, but it's odds are much better.
So, what about variety? Am I against variety? No. In fact, I have suggested that the SC have its prow launch bay dropped to strength 1 in exchange for the extra shield (solving the believability problem of the model and maintaining low cost) while simultaneously adding a launch bay variant SC (replacing WBs with 1TH each side for +15pts). Maximum of half SCs as this latter variant. This adds variety of ship, maintains the option to keep the current number of total AC while being cheaper, albeit with less supporting WB firepower. It also gives the option of a more gun focussed fleet by not taking maximum carrier variants. On top of this a TH for BC swap and a TH for torp swap gives a total of 4 different SC variants. This could potentially be raised to 6 variants if the carrier version could also swap prow TH with either torps or BC (just that no more than half the SCs could have broadside launch bays).
Sigoroth, you blast lances for being against fluff, and then propose a carrier version? o_0?
Similarly, variants for the battlebarges could be proposed. So there's no SM hating going on. We want a balanced and interesting fleet. It's just that this can and should be done sans lances. There is zero call for lances on SM ships. They simply don't need them, shouldn't have them, and have an alternative weapon system to make up for the loss.
To ask for them on top of what they already have as well as what they're already getting and what has already been proposed smacks of fanboyism. Baron, you say you're not a fanboy because you don't have a SM army or fleet. Well you don't need to own SMs to be a fanboy, you've just got to buy into the more outrageous fluff. You seem to buy into every piece of fluff without any of it passing through an internal plausibility checker in your brain. Your knowledge seems encyclopaedic (and this assumes that it's right, I know that some of it I and others have been unable to check, and still others have found fault with) but like an encyclopaedia it seems to be presented with no regard for sense. Just vomited forth wholly.
And ignored mostly. The fluff for them having lances in Planetstrike makes perfect sense. We have a situation were, by inquisitorial decree, there is to be as little collateral damage as possible, ad they opt to use a precision weapon rather then a bombardment cannon.
And, bluntly, nothing to do with space marines is plausible, so I just assume the warp did it. Seriously, have you ever looked into the biology of it? They should be toothless and dead.
Mind you, you don't have to hate SMs to hate the more extreme fluff they're involved in. According to which it wouldn't be too hard for a SM to destroy all of Chaos, Eldar, Orks, etc as well as reorder all of the Imperium in their own image while playing bridge with their spare hand. This crap makes a mockery of the SM and it's understandable why people get short with any more calls for super SMs, particularly in BFG where they're supposed to be a very minor player. (In truth they're supposed to be directly supported by the IN and if they go in alone then that's their lookout - their objective is to land troops, not dominate space.)
See above statements. And, you have a problem translating the ideal to the reality there. As an example, with no IN in Ultramar, wouldn't they have a very good reason to possess pure gunboats? Or in the case of BT, the fact that they frequently go crusading without support from other Imperial organizations?
And, again, the fluff for SCs is they are the first responders, in system BEFORE IN. IN takes months (or even years) to mobilize against threats. Look at the difficulty they had during the early stage of the Gothic War. If SM had to wait for IN support, then the Imperium would have fallen long ago.
