Space Marine Fleet ER

[Vaaish]

Sig, I don't think that would be an accurate representation in game terms unless you put all of the existing lists on the same LD chart with various modifiers. With different groups having different charts to roll on the game allows for a more exaggerated view of the LD differences for gameplay.

I guess it could be interesting to put everyone on the same table and use modifiers to set the general ld range and beyond that include X number of commanders that give and additional +1 to LD.

So IN and admech wouldn't have any modifiers, eldar and marines would get +1 to LD. The Marine MoTF, admech commanders, and Eldar commander would have 2 veteran commanders included in their cost that grant +1 ld to the ship they are on or some such like that.  It would have the effect of bumping up the average LD of AdMech to be a little more elite than IN and give Eldar and Marines the highest LD as well.

[Brad]

The only problem I have with the SM fleet is the serious under-gunnage of the strike cruiser.  Bombardment cannon look good on paper but FP3 means you're lucky to roll a single die most of the time.

This comment is only from my own experiences, which I have no doubt are considerably less than just about everybody else's, so take it for what it's worth.

[Admiral_d_Artagnan]

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

You haven't made it better. As for the THA, simple solution if you don't think they need bombers: get rid of it. Don't touch the fighter aspect of the TH.

[Admiral_d_Artagnan]

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

As long as it is the SedO in the 2010 stuff with WBs instead of lances.

[RayB HA]

zaxqua,

A 'normal' Chapter could consist of the 6 escorts (not including the falchion), the Strike cruiser, the Battle Barge GC and the Venerable Battle barge. I'm not sure about including the Arcane and Crusader BB's in a normal list.
I've toyed with SC variants, some even with limited lance broadsides or torps instead of TH's. Or more TH's and less guns. In the end the SC is what it is needed to be, especially with torps added. There doesn't seem a variant to make that makes any real difference. Adding the Torp Dauntless to the Crusade fleet adds variety but It wouldn't really fit in a normal list.

The real problem I'm facing is that the Crusade fleet is just an expansion of the 'normal' list. If you don't care about fluff you'd just pick a Crusade fleet! Maybe if the Battle Barges were for every 2 SC in the 'normal list and for every 3 in the Crusade list.

Brad,

SM's should be under gunned some what... The BC should be used with the WB so you can get the 'golden' shot past shields. I've added the ability to launch torps to the SC's, it's only 4 but it's an added punch to use after the TH's have been launched.

Cheers,

RayB HA

[RayB HA]

Hi All,

I've added the actual fleet lists, please try to ignore the points values they're just upper values that I don't want to exceed.
 
Admiral_d_Artagnan,

Why do you like the fighter aspect of the TH's over the CAP special rule? Is it because it's more simple? The way I see it TH's are similar to Tau Mantas, they should be AC with a 4+ save vs fighters not being fighters themselves.
The CAP special rule seems to be necessary to counter the loss of the fighter special rule. Would it be that bad if they had no fighters or CAP (except Annhilators)? The escorts would be vulnerable to A-boats (although the -1 does help with this), the capital ships excluding the dauntless wouldn't be greatly effected by this loss.
Hmm..... I'm leaning towards getting rid of the CAP rule!

I've included the SedO but have tweaked the launchbays/torps.

Cheers,

RayB HA

[Vaaish]

It was my understanding that the ordnance and AC on teh SedO were dropped because the additional barrage bomb magazines needed to supply that many cannons would eat into the remaining space due to the size of the rounds. Now there isn't much reason not to take it unless you dislike short range.

[Admiral_d_Artagnan]

Admiral_d_Artagnan,

Why do you like the fighter aspect of the TH's over the CAP special rule? Is it because it's more simple? The way I see it TH's are similar to Tau Mantas, they should be AC with a 4+ save vs fighters not being fighters themselves.
The CAP special rule seems to be necessary to counter the loss of the fighter special rule. Would it be that bad if they had no fighters or CAP (except Annhilators)? The escorts would be vulnerable to A-boats (although the -1 does help with this), the capital ships excluding the dauntless wouldn't be greatly effected by this loss.
Hmm..... I'm leaning towards getting rid of the CAP rule!

I've included the SedO but have tweaked the launchbays/torps.

Cheers,

RayB HA

Yes, simple is the reason. You basically remove their fighter status and then add a rule making them semi-fighters. I mean, huh?

Which SedO is this?

[lastspartacus]

First question: what is 'ER'

[RCgothic]

Experimental Rules.

[zaxqua]

One comment: In the blood angels omnibus captain Idean states "I served aboard the strike cruiser Fidelis at armageddon. She was a mine-layer, among other things, and in my duties I learned the limitations of that wepon"
a quote from your rules "No orbital mines may be taken, this is for fluff reasons only"

[RayB HA]

Admiral_d_Artagnan,

Yeah, I'm gonna ditch the special CAP rule.

zaxqua,

Well that's weird! The Author seems like a Blood Angles nut however he may not have done too much research regarding orbital mines. I wouldn't let a novel lock background (unless wriiten by the gamesworkshop studio).

Cheers,

RayB HA

[RayB HA]

Hi Guys,

CAP: I've removed the CAP rules and added Annhilators as a free choice for any Chapter. This unclutters the rules somewhat and makes them less weird.

Shield Strength: I've reduced the shield strength of the armour 6+ Battle Barges, 3 for the BB's and 2 for the GC. This reduction doesn't reduce the ships survivabilty below that of other ships of their size. In fact, the Arcane and Crusader BB's will be somewhat competetive beyond points. This also helps to show which is a GC or BB as the GC will use a small base and the BB a large base. Having fewer shields will also reduce their cost.

Arcane and Crusader BBs: I'm going to tweak their stats, any ideas?

BC's: I can't really figure why these are so good against ordnance. However with the drop of the fighter rule from TH's it would be a damaging to drop this rule as well.

Cheers,

RayB HA

[Vaaish]

This whole thing with the CG battle barges and all feels... wrong. battlebarges and the models for them have always been BB sized with CG models being somewhat smaller. IT also feels confusing to have two ships effectively the same name yet different classes and wildly different stats. This just doesn't seem intuitive to a player using any of the existing marine lists and ships coming to this. I think battlebarges need to stay battleships and strike cruisers have the range between light cruiser and cruiser but without any of this grand cruiser stuff. It's not really needed IMO and it seems to be adding rules complexity that's unwarranted.

[zaxqua]

Sorry Ray, after reading the Omnibus again I reallised the author also has a gladius make a teleport attack. 
 I would recomend making the arcane BB more like the Vengeful Spirit from powers of chaos. And removing the CAP rule makes stormravens useless except as assult boats.