Yes, Orbital Assets for intell and other purposes and systems like the Predator Drone are part of the wave of 21st Century Warfare.  In the Slammer novels on many occasions, the first thing they take out are enemy satillites. And even when I was on active duty we were trained to work with SF to emplace Backpack sized Nucs ... But in a Slammer story they had Nuc Dampening Fields ...   So who knows what the future holds ?  However sometimes you want to seize, hold and secure an Objective as opposed to Nuc'ing it.  Plus remember the other weapon of Sci-fi that's not too far from reality ... the God Rod. It can kill just like a Nuc but with no fallout ...

_________________
Legion 4 "Cry Havoc, and let slip the Dogs of War !" ... "People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf."

Unfortunately some Armies (like China, Vietnam of the 50s & 60s, etc.) believe Attrition is a Principle of War ... not an aboration, but standard procedures.  And there is a military concept that says any Objective can be taken if you are willing to pay the price ...

_________________
Legion 4 "Cry Havoc, and let slip the Dogs of War !" ... "People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf."

We still use the SM1 TO&E where 8 stands is a Tactical Unit. A 40 man Plt(+ or -) is the norm for most militaries. So that works for us. As well as a Dev Detachment is 4 stands, which represents a Hvy Wpns Plt which in reality is about right ...

_________________
Legion 4 "Cry Havoc, and let slip the Dogs of War !" ... "People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf."

And following on from L4, all wargames are somewhat one-dimensional where in reality there is the political side of things that directs (or mis-directs) the effort. Attrition is aimed as much at the political structure as the military, trying to pursuade them of the futility of continuing the conflict as much as trying to sap the strength of the military. We also ignore the logisitcal side of warfare which often has a major impact - consider the German MBTs in the Battle of the Bulge.

The point is that of necessity, wargames are a simplification representing the battlefield events over a short time-period, without consideration to the past or future. The great appeal of campaigning is in putting the particular battle into the wider context of attrition, politics, logisitcs etc. But in doing this we must translate the often brutal results of wargame battlefield rules into the more long-term perspective of a campaign.

_________________
"Play up and play the game"

Vitai lampada
Sir Hemry Newbolt

A lot of armies in the "modern" era have been willing to accept horrendous casualties. Look at the Russians in WW2. They regularly had units utterly shattered in combat, only for the survivors to band together and fight to the last. And let's not start on the Japanese, in their wars against Russia in 1904 and WW2. The Germans did similar things with messed up and broken outfits that shouyld by right have become "combat ineffective" through casualties and general disruption.

To imagine that a corps of genetically engineered, religiously brain-washed supermen wouldn't fight on regardless of casualties is to underestimate the limits of what the human psyche, as well as human totalitarian regimes and organizations are able to do.

Which all means I think the SM are totally capable of fighting attrition battles and still be true to the fluff. They are so elite that they will achieve incredible casaulty ratios versus any lesser opponents. The point of deploying SM in ground-pounder warfare is that they achieve very high firepower at one small spot of the enemy lines (such as the company/battalion level fights Epic simulates), and that they are able to survive defensive fire in volumes that would shred an IG unit. In my view they are the ones who get sent in to do the missions that other troops just can't survive, including air assaults AND ground attacks. That the current main list puts ground pounding marines at a disadvantage in comparison to air assaulters is a problem. But I do see the problems of changing the standing list. An alternative list would be interesting IMO.

_________________
"Don't use finesse, if force will solve the problem."

- Lieutenant General Michael O'Neal

Since the furor seems to have died down a bit...

OK, presuming I (or some other eager soul) does create an alternate list, what should it be:

Simply the current marine list, with adjusted costs?  This option has some appeal, but as far as I can tell this is never going to replace the official marine list anyway, so there's no particular point in trying.  

Current marine list with adjusted costs and some additional equipment (like a few Land Raider variants, etc.)?  I think the appeal of this is obvious.  

Or is there some other option I'm not considering?

_________________
The Apocrypha of Skaros 1.1
Rogue Trader Expedition 0.4
The Horus Heresy 0.5
Night Lords 0.1
My Trade Thread

I wasn't trying to infer that mentally, 40K soldiers would become unable to fight. The point I was trying to make is that just using simple statistical regression, that at a 30% casualty rate (which in the 40K game is considered being hugely successful), there are only so many battles you can go through before you just don't have a bodies left...at least for the Space Marines.

IG, sure, over a million worlds, a galacic population too numerous to count, Tyranids without number no problem, Orks...they've got fungus everywhere, but SM...1000 guys in a chapter and a 1000 chapters. Plus you can't just go back to the ranch and pop another dozen out of the corral. They have to "make" them using the geneseed of a previous owner.

I could go on.

That's why I said, it's best not to try and draw "reality" into the equation, it messes everything up.

_________________
Honda

"Remember Taros? We do"

- 23rd Elysian Drop Regiment

Honda --> Hm... yeah, reality is tricky... Internal logic is another thing. Its true, games such as 40K and Epic produce huge casaulty figures. I always looked at it that most of the removed figures are wounded, shell shocked, helping injured comrades or running away. And the 1000 marines in 1000 chapters thing... To be honest I always read that like a biblical phrase such as "40 days and 40 nights", meaning essentially "lots and lots". The thing with the gene-seed is that it doesn't matter how many troops they lose, as long as the win the battle. It's the seed that is important in replacing losses, and to a certain extent ancient irreplaceable war gear. This makes the actual marine trooper's bodies little less than "carrier" system for the superior genetical and technological heritage of the ancestors... I find this theme of the SM fluff very resonant with mythological themes of sacrifice and gods inhabiting the worshipper's bodies. (Which essentially means I think it is dead cool. )

But I get where you're coming from. I guess you can look at it from different angles. Like I said, I think a ground pounder list would be fun and add another dimension to the game.

_________________
"Don't use finesse, if force will solve the problem."

- Lieutenant General Michael O'Neal

@Ares,

I'm with ya! I would also like to see a grounder list, if for no other reason than variety.

Let us see what the other sage minds come up with...

_________________
Honda

"Remember Taros? We do"

- 23rd Elysian Drop Regiment

Why is everyone trying to reinvent the Scions of Iron list?
From the suggestion of 4 Tacticals + tanks formations, to Land Raider variants- it's been done, and it's been done in the Scions list.

Seriously, give that list a go- it's as close to a competitive ground-based Marine list as your gonna get.

It's still quite hard to use as Marines aren't intended to be IG with better saves, but it works better than trying to use the Air Assault list as Ground Pounders.

Clausewitz.  

Just wanted to chime in as yet another someone toying around with the idea. The straightforward basic idea is 3-4 independent Warhounds as Engage initiators (30 cm move, compact, Void Shields) and others as Fire Support.

The Scions of Iron list provides no option for Devastators or Assault Marines.  It's not a Codex list.  The whole point of this would be to make a Codex list - that was not based around air assaulting (whether it retained deep striking is a very good question).  

Plus, there's the whole "I don't want to play Scions of Iron, I want to play my chapter" dimension.  

The Scions of Iron list is an Armored Company, not a ground list.  This would be Mechanized Infantry, not Armor.  

Anyway, the question remains open - simply change the costs of the extant list, or make some additions?  

Personally, I lean toward a few additions.  A few LR variants might be nice, as might the Thunderfire.

_________________
The Apocrypha of Skaros 1.1
Rogue Trader Expedition 0.4
The Horus Heresy 0.5
Night Lords 0.1
My Trade Thread

Scions armour, Sallies mechanised



How would that not just replace the current list?

I'm all in favour of such a list incidentally, just not as a replacement. Stuff like 4 strong tarantula (4 strong tarantula) and flak sentries (3 and a controller), damocles rhinos as cheap leaders for formations (25 points), Prometheus command, option of massed assault troops (8? strong) for taking breaches etc. In fact it would be an Imperial Fists army

_________________
If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com!
'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' – Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913
"Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography."
General Plumer, 191x

Yeah but you have to use MultiMeltas to play Salamanders.



Well, you could set a 0-1 (per 300pts) limit on the Landing Craft/Thunderhawk Gunship (and have them as a single list choice) so the air element is minimised. Or transport Thunderhawks/LC's could simply be removed entirely.

On the other hand you could simply raise the points costs of the Thunderhawk and Landing Craft, to keep them in the list, but then drop some points costs of ground based formations. Make it so that an airbourne list would be slightly more expensive in points than a rulebook air assault list.

Spacecraft should be removed, or similarly be significantly increased in points costs.

Introduce a Thunderhawk with bombs and missiles (something like is seen in the Scions list), or some kind of 'missiles' upgrade for the standard Thunderhawk (could be a 'character', to use the standard Epic rules).

Use some of the variant vehicles, like the different flavours of Land Raider (Hyperios, Redeemer, Crusader), the different flavours of Land Speeder (Storm and Tempest), the

Have some vehicles available both as seperate formations, and as upgrades (possibly look at how the Blood Angels list does this in pairs so points costs can be fine tuned).

Add a Dreadnought formation, so that they don't become extinct.

And mess with some points costs, to reduce the prices of various ground based formations.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

The Multi-melta troops are only upgrades. So you can play without them.

_________________
We are returned!
http://www.epic-wargaming.de/