Space Marine Fleet ER

[RayB HA]

Horizon,

Yes I know of the 2010 marines draft! 

There are just numerous things I'd like to add or change. Most importantly nailing down a crusade list that isn't full of IN ships! And just as importantly sorting out the Venerable BB so it can't be one of a dozen ships! 

I want a list that you can happily use to represent almost any chapter including Grey Knights! (Grey Knights would be available to Inq fleets as reserves!)

Also properly represnting the AC and including the Storm Raven for those chapters that can take them.

We didn't get a reply from GW!  I may go to Gamesday this year and just hand it over to Andy Hall. 

Cheers,

RayB HA

[horizon]

We didn't get a reply from GW!  I may go to Gamesday this year and just hand it over to Andy Hall. 

Hit him with it. At least they could've replied and said they don't use it. Weird company.


VBB's: will the sedition reincarnated continue in your proposal?

[RayB HA]

Vaaish,

Sig pretty much stole my rant right out of my mouth!   SC's aren't 'crewed' by SM's anyway. +1 Ld reps the fact they have got all of the best resources at their disposal, just like AM! (Except AM have refits!)

Admiral_d_Artagnan,

If it's not broken why fix it? I prefer: If I can make it better, shouldn't I?  
Seriously though I do believe SMs need some work to make them more intersting and to cut some of the exaggerated fat off.
In the case of Annhilators they just aren't bombers, they're not even fighter bombers! Representing them as such is just a mad attempt to give SM's bombers when they sure as hell shouldn't have any!

Cheers,

RayB HA

[RayB HA]

Horizon,

The SedO is a bit of a freak! I'm inclined to include it but as a character ship (well it is isn't it?) Ultra Marines only!

Also the Fortress Monastary should only be available for special scenarios out side of a normal campaign. So it's not too important to perfect!

Cheers,

RayB HA

[Vaaish]

Sig I won't deny that eldar have better tech, but better tech doesn't mean you instantly become masters of tactics or warfare, it just means you have better tools. That's something I don't think anyone would argue Eldar don't already have. Although from the fluff we have from Armada, marine vessels seem to be almost entirely automated with the chapter serfs on board in a monitoring and maintenance function. While inferior to eldar tech, it seems a far cry for the IN's massive use of manpower to operate vessels.

If you are so sure that eldar shouldn't be in the same league, then why not adjust their LD rather than the marines? Just give them 10's across the board and you're done since they've had thousands of years of practice compared to humanity. Of course, we can't do that now can we because it would make Eldar too good. See, the thing is just growing up on a ship doesn't translate into tactical capability. It translates into technical capability in the form of an intimate understanding of how the systems on the ship work, but it won't make you a tactician. Knowing what your ship can do doesn't equal knowing when you should do it. That's where training for combat and leading others comes into play which is what the marines do a good chunk of their lives when they aren't actually fighting.

Now you'll probably want to come back and wave your hand with some statement about how dare I not agree with you, but I do not agree with what you presented. It makes a case for eldar having better tech (which they already do) and better knowledge of celestial phenomena (which they do already here too) but it's not a valid argument for dropping Marine leadership to AdMech or IN levels.

Ray, I realize they aren't crewed by Marines entirely. Marines get the best resources and the ships are commanded by the marines, who are some of the best leaders available to humanity. If AdMech get refits, then at the very least Marines should use the Admech LD table with the option to take marine captains inexpensively for +1ld.

The way I see it, IN should have the worst human LD, followed by AdMech being slightly better, followed by Marines at the top.

[Sigoroth]

Now you'll probably want to come back and wave your hand with some statement about how dare I not agree with you, but I do not agree with what you presented. It makes a case for eldar having better tech (which they already do) and better knowledge of celestial phenomena (which they do already here too) but it's not a valid argument for dropping Marine leadership to AdMech or IN levels.

Yes it is. Leadership in BFG has nothing to do with tactical capability. It has to do with technical expertise, job competence and knowledge and experience with celestial phenomena. Even if it had something to do with tactical ability (which it clearly does not) I would argue that the Eldar warmasters are at least as good as the SMs in this regard, particularly when you factor in farseers.

[Vaaish]

Part of the job competence of the commander of the ship IS his tactical ability. It's his ability to read a situation and know what order to give in the first place that makes him competent. The training of the crew aids in the successful execution of an order, but it's still the commander who initiates the right order at the right time. Since it would seem both Eldar and Marines rely on large amounts of automation to run their ships, I would think that crew training would have even less impact on carrying out orders than aboard an IN ship.

I have no problem with Eldar having as good LD as marines. Let them use the Marine LD table if it doesn't hurt the game, but why bother with changing marine LD if you feel Eldar LD is too low?

[RayB HA]

Vaaish,

Forget the Eldar comparison for the moment.
A SM ship will have a better crew than normal IN but it still doesn't equate to the crazy awesome they currently have!
AM and SM ships are similar when taking the actual crew into account. As SM's can actually get Ld 10 where AM can't, this caters to the better captainsy. It's a very minimal effect but it's there all the same.  

The tactical training etc will not be exclusive to SM's! Infact in that regard the IN wouldn't be that shabby. It's only their equipment and backwards approach to technology that will hamper them.

Cheers,

RayB HA

[Vaaish]

Ray,
I only use the eldar comparison because you mentioned it in your first post as the reason for dropping Marine LD! I'm not entirely sure why you are finding the LD marines have currently as an issue outside of the Eldar bit you mentioned. From what I've seen, the high LD is necessary for the marine fleet to function properly with SO rolls for RO, LO, and AAF needed to get in position and hit hard enough to cripple before they take too much return fire. Reducing LD makes it more likely a player won't be able to rely on activating a SO when it's needed. I guess the same effect could be achieved by giving Marines more rerolls in the MoTF base profile and the +1 to LD. This just doesn't seem like a necessary change like the boarding and hit and run changes.

(no, I'm not saying tactical training is exclusive to marines, just that they have likely had more such training and their lengthy lifespans would all them to accumulate far more experience than your average IN commander)

I'm curious to see what the point values you have for the ships you edited in your first post is. The cheaper BB with better turning and speed is nice, but how much cheaper is it? I'm also curious if you are getting rid of the upgrades for the SC like the extra shield and LB swaps?

[RayB HA]

Vaaish,

I'll change my designers notes regarding leadership.

Rerolls will be available just as before. At 25pts each they're a steal! Also for Crusader fleets the Forge Ship will give you a reroll for RO!

For the moment I'm nailing down the stats, the points will come later.

Cheers,

RayB HA

[Sigoroth]

Part of the job competence of the commander of the ship IS his tactical ability. It's his ability to read a situation and know what order to give in the first place that makes him competent. The training of the crew aids in the successful execution of an order, but it's still the commander who initiates the right order at the right time. Since it would seem both Eldar and Marines rely on large amounts of automation to run their ships, I would think that crew training would have even less impact on carrying out orders than aboard an IN ship.

There is no tactical component to the Ld value in the game. The tactical component comes from you, the player.

I have no problem with Eldar having as good LD as marines. Let them use the Marine LD table if it doesn't hurt the game, but why bother with changing marine LD if you feel Eldar LD is too low?

I don't feel that the Eldar Ld is too low. I feel that the SM Ld is too high. It should be less than Eldar. Eldar are superior in every meaningful metric of spacefaring.

[Vaaish]

Changing marine LD ends up interfering with the LD distribution between IN, Admech, and Marines which seems fairly accurate right now. If the problem is eldar then deal with them and leave the rest alone.

[Sigoroth]

Changing marine LD ends up interfering with the LD distribution between IN, Admech, and Marines which seems fairly accurate right now. If the problem is eldar then deal with them and leave the rest alone.

I don't think so. I think that the differences between these 3 factions would fade to insignificance at this scale.

[zaxqua]

It seems to me like you are giving a lot of extra options to crusader/Grey Knights fleets but not much to the world-based SM chapters. More variety with the cruisers is needed. I like the stormraven, very fluffy.

[horizon]

I agree with SG on the Ld issue, though I would go for Marines are equal to Eldar Ld approach. Just because they can.